Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Live Digest banner
Want the scoop on hot races around the country? Get the digest emailed to you each weekday morning. Sign up here.
Pres-by-CD: Yesterday, I lamented our lack of precinct-level results from New York City, and less than a day later, we got a complete set. (For the record, today, I'm lamenting my lack of a BMW 7-Series...)

Today's update is one of the largest since we had to go county dumpster-diving for results: with NYC, as well as Lebanon County and the city of Philadelphia from Pennsylvania, we can add 15 districts to our total.

New York (NY-06 through NY-16)

Pennsylvania (PA-02, PA-06, PA-13, PA-15)

There isn't all that much to say about the Pennsylvania results, as they are consistent with what we've already seen from the state. The Democratic districts are extremely so (PA-02 is 91 percent Obama; PA-13 is 66 percent), while the Republican districts are only narrowly so (PA-06 and PA-15 are both 51-48 Romney districts.)

The New York results, though, crack open a whole new box of candy. Starting in Staten Island, we can see the Republican-in-Obama-districts club gains a new member in the form of Rep. Mike Grimm, whose Staten Island-based NY-11 swung from a McCain district in 2008 to a 52 percent Obama district last year.

NY-08 and NY-09, the two Brooklyn-based Black-majority districts (NY-08 also includes Howard Beach/Ozone Park in Queens), are strongly Democratic as expected. NY-07, Nydia Velazquez's BK-Manhattan-Queens amalgam is also strongly Democratic. All are above 85 percent Obama, with the difference likely attributable to the size of Republican-leaning communities within those districts. (Yvette Clarke's NY-09 takes in the most, with a large swath of Ocean Parkway and Sheepshead Bay, as well as Crown Heights. NY-07 takes in the Hasidic side of Williamsburg in addition to the hipster side, while Hakeem Jeffries' NY-08 covers Brighton Beach and Bergen Beach.)

Moving north, we come to the two city districts where Obama's numbers fell somewhat, the Manhattan-based NY-10 (Jerrold Nadler) and NY-12 (Carolyn Maloney). Perhaps unsurprisingly, these are also the city districts with the highest White population share. Both districts are strongly Democratic still (74-76 percent Obama, respectively), though the Republican votes come from different places here. Nadler's district also includes heavily Orthodox Borough Park in Brooklyn (home to the most Republican precincts in NYC, even more so than the South Shore of Staten Island), and Maloney's district includes the affluent Upper East Side, where Obama's numbers saw the greatest drop.

In contrast to NY-12, the two other districts covering Queens (for which we have complete data) did show substantial improvement for Obama. Grace Meng's Asian-plurality NY-06 swung 5 points in our direction to 68 percent Obama, while Joe Crowley's NY-14 (which also covers parts of the Bronx) swung 4 points to 81 percent Obama. The president's numbers also improved in Eliot Engel's NY-16, which extends from impoverished parts of the Bronx (e.g., Williamsbridge and Eastchester the neighborhood) to some of the very wealthy parts of lower Westchester (Mamaroneck, Scarsdale, etc.).

Finally, we can conclude with another study in contrast: yesterday, we ended with a discussion of the most Republican district in the country (TX-13); today, we'll conclude with what will likely be the two most Democratic, the Upper Manhattan-based NY-13 (Charlie Rangel) and South Bronx-based NY-15 (Jose Serrano). Obama got upwards of 94 percent here, but that doesn't hold a candle to his 96.7 percent performance in NY-15 (to Romney's 3.0 percent)! Romney received 5,315 votes here, meaning he received only slightly more than half the votes he received in 2008! (We estimate that he received about 9,400 votes here then). The whopping 95 percent margin renders NY-15, surely, the most Democratic district in the nation. (jeffmd)

11:31 AM PT: NJ-Sen: To go along with their gubernatorial numbers, FDU also has a look at a potential Democratic primary (PDF) between Sen. Frank Lautenberg and Newark Mayor Cory Booker. In the pollster's parlance, "among self-identified Democrats and Democratic leaners," Booker leads Lautenberg 42-20. Booker has a much higher favorability rating: 66-13 vs. 45-29 for Lautenberg, but those numbers represent all voters, not just Democrats. (The crosstabs don't include party breakdowns for those particular questions, for some reason.) As for the head-to-heads, that's not a bad place for Booker to be in, and I'm not sure I'd like seeing that "20" if I were the incumbent. But it's a lot closer than the 59-22 margin PPP recently found in favor of Booker.

11:40 AM PT: PPP's new VA-Sen poll is up. More soon.

12:28 PM PT: VA-Sen: PPP now confirms what you already knew about freshman Dem Sen. Mark Warner: He's looking good for 2014. In fact, I'd even say "very good," seeing as his 52-31 job approval rating makes him the most popular politician in Virginia. And here's how Warner fares against the biggest Republican names, none of whom have actually expressed even the slightest interest in challenging him:

• 52-42 vs. Gov. Bob McDonnell

• 53-35 vs. Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling

• 56-37 vs. Rep. Eric Cantor

• 57-36 vs. AG Ken Cuccinelli

We should probably come up with a term for this, but the standard guess says that the GOP will have to rely on random rich guy or unknown state legislator, though I can't imagine them getting much traction either way. (Just imagine if Harris Miller had been the Democratic nominee in 2006 instead of Jim Webb.) After three straight Senate failures in a row in Virginia for Republicans, hopefully they'll just leave this one alone.

P.S. A couple of other tidbits: Newly elected Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine starts off with a 42-36 job approval rating (even though he'd been on the job all of one day when PPP went into the field!). President Obama's approvals are pretty hale, at 53-43—a good sign, given that he won here by only four points in November. Democrats also hold a four-point lead on the generic legislative ballot; all 100 seats in the state House are up for re-election this fall.

12:46 PM PT: IL-03: This would an awesome way to get rid of conservaDem Dan Lipinski, who has proved stubbornly resistant to any kind of primary challenge: Make him ambassador to the Vatican. According to the Chicago Tribune, Lipinski is indeed being considered for the post by the president, and his anti-choice views would probably make him a comfortable fit in that role. Most importantly, it would give progressives a chance to elect someone much more palatable in this 56-43 Obama district: If a special election were needed to fill the seat, there would also be a special primary, just like we're seeing right now in the Jesse Jackson, Jr. district. So if Lipinski gets this ambassadorship, this'll be a huge race for us to focus on.

12:59 PM PT: VA-Gov: Whaddya know. I'd have thought polls showing me scoring in the teens as an independent candidate in a race for governor would be pretty depressing, but Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling has a much more optimistic take:

"The bottom line is on a first poll, without even declaring an independent candidacy, I'm getting a higher percentage of the vote than any independent candidate has ever gotten in the history of the state," he said. "So that's actually fairly encouraging to me."
That's definitely one way to look at it! It also happens to be shockingly wrong, considering that former Sen. Harry Byrd, Jr. won two terms as an independent after leaving the Democratic Party in 1970. Maybe Bolling only meant gubernatorial races, but that isn't what he said. Anyhow, if he wants to run, that still sounds pretty good to me, though I have to wonder why he just met privately with... Terry McAuliffe, the likely Democratic nominee. Neither man is revealing any details about their get-together, but hmm....

1:32 PM PT: NJ-05: Looks like ex-Rep. Steve Rothman, who lost a bruising member-vs.-member primary last year to fellow Dem Rep. Bill Pascrell, will be cashing in. He's joining the local law firm of Sills Cummis to lead their new defense industry lobbying group, and for once, a former politician is being forthright about exactly what he's up to. Explains Rothman:

My experience with defense issues and my familiarity with how to get one's foot in the door for consideration at the Pentagon stems from my eight years as a member of the House appropriations subcommittee on defense—a 25-person subcommittee that recommends all of the military spending for the U.S.
Yep, that's about the long and short of it! Anyhow, we're filing this one under NJ-05, the home of GOP Rep. Scott Garrett, because that's the most plausible place Rothman could have staged a comeback, but the upshot of this announcement is that Rothman, age 60, is very unlikely to make another run for office.

2:31 PM PT: NC-07: It was the closest House race in the nation in 2012, in a district tailor-made to elect a Republican. But former state Sen. David Rouzer fell 654 improbable votes short of unseating Dem Rep. Mike McIntyre, making McIntyre one of the most remarkable survivors of the cycle. Given the closeness of the race, though, it's no surprise that Rouzer is already thinking about a rematch—and says that if he does go for it, he'll start campaigning in February. Rouzer now blames his "late" start on his loss, though it's not like he got in that late (he filed formal paperwork with the FEC in August of 2011). I'd guess his bigger hurdle was having to deal with a serious primary, so I wonder if he's trying to clear the field by getting in early. As for McIntyre, he might need a miracle to survive lower Democratic turnout in the mid-term year, but if anyone could pull it off, he could.

2:37 PM PT: MA-Gov: The Massachusetts Democratic gubernatorial primary could get quite crowded indeed. State AG Martha Coakley on Wednesday didn't even bother with a classic politician's dodge, instead merely saying "no comment" in response to a question about whether she'd run for governor in 2014. (Seriously, though, "no comment"? That's really weak. You've got to be able to do better than that.)

2:48 PM PT: IL-Gov: Republican state Treasurer Dan Rutherford gets his obligatory mention in the Digest: He's now all but confirmed that he's running for governor this cycle, though he's still refusing to say the magic words. Rutherford says he'll make a formal announcement after President Obama is sworn in for a second term on Jan. 21, so until then, seeya!

3:01 PM PT: MA-Sen: Add one more big name to the roster of people endorsing Rep. Ed Markey for Senate: Barney Frank, who of course is angling for a temporary appointment to the seat Markey would like to win outright. And in classic Frank fashion, he also tried to nudge Rep. Mike Capuano away from the Democratic primary, saying he's supporting Markey because he thinks "Capuano is probably not running."

One notable aspect of Frank's move that hasn't much been remarked on so far is that Frank blamed unhappiness over redistricting as a reason for his retirement last year—and even went as far to accuse Markey of getting preferential treatment. So by swallowing his anger here and rallying around the anointed candidate, it looks like Frank is continuing his efforts to please the establishment and convince Gov. Deval Patrick that he's the right man for the interim job.

3:06 PM PT: MN-Gov: Though he just ruled out a Senate comeback in 2014, Republican Norm Coleman now tells the Minneapolis-based Star Tribune that he isn't closing the door on a possible gubernatorial bid. We'll check back in with ol' Norm when he's got something more definitive for us. Also, in an odd detail, Coleman refused to tell the Strib whether or not he'd spoken to GOP Reps. Erik Paulsen and John Kline about running against Sen. Al Franken. What does that mean? Why be so cagey? Weird.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Posting content before an empty digest joke? (4+ / 0-)

    David must have had his wheaties today...

  •  Gov. Cuomo pivoting leftwards (14+ / 0-)

    Let the 2016 speculation commence

    He proposed increasing the minimum wage to $8.75 an hour from $7.25 an hour, public financing of elections, tougher greenhouse gas standards, solar jobs programs, a $1 billion affordable housing initiative, grants for schools that extend school days and a 10-point women’s rights program that garnered loud applause for its provisions strengthening abortion rights laws and enacting equal pay legislation...

    The governor gave some of his most impassioned remarks to date on guns, a cause he has voiced support for in the past but has not made a legislative priority...

    “Climate change is real,” he said. “It is denial to say each of these situations is a once-in-a-lifetime. There is a 100-year flood every two years now. It is inarguable that the sea is warmer and there is a changing weather pattern, and the time to act is now.”

    The article also mentions the pending power-sharing agreement between the IDC and GOP in the state senate, which should grease the wheels for a lot of the most popular proposals, like additional gun control and an increase in the minimum wage.  The GOP won't stand in the way of such popular bills, if that's what it takes to stay in power.

    Anyway, 2016 chatter aside, I'm simply happy to see Gov. Cuomo remembering that he is in fact a Democrat and New York deserves more progressive leadership.

    •  Cuomo was always a Democrat (7+ / 0-)

      He just has never been a liberal Democrat. He is more of a New Democrat type, ala The Big Dog.

    •  I don't support longer school days or school years (13+ / 0-)

      I always benefited from having summer vacation, and when I was in high school, I completed my requirements early and was able to leave school at 2 o'clock every day in my junior and senior years. It doesn't seem to have done me harm, as I was Valedictorian in high school and graduated from college Summa Cum Laude.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:19:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (5+ / 0-)

        But all the research suggests that longer school days and years results in better educational achievement.

        Besides, this is probably too policy oriented a discussion so... :P

        23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

        by wwmiv on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:45:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The idea is: (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, dufffbeer, DCCyclone, BeloitDem

        To help poor students achieve more by depending less on their parents to help them outside of school.
        There have been some studies suggesting that educational achievement gaps expand over summer breaks because the middle to upper class students do activities during breaks that are more intellectually stimulating than sitting at home watching lots of television. Yes, it is paternalistic; it may be helpful for some students though.
        There are, of course, downsides as well. It's important that the extra time be made useful, and to not treat it as just extended babysitting.

        I pledge allegiance to liberty and justice for all.

        by childers moof on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:51:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Do poor kids just watch TV? ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BeloitDem, JBraden

          There have been some studies suggesting that educational achievement gaps expand over summer breaks because the middle to upper class students do activities during breaks that are more intellectually stimulating than sitting at home watching lots of television.

          or is it just that they don't get the breaks rich kids get?  If I'm poor .. I can't afford an internship(say .. at The Nation) at a lot of places .. especially once that don't pay .. or pay very little .. while rich kids can afford to take non-paying internships

      •  But your story undermines your position (5+ / 0-)

        It didn't do you any harm because you were naturally talented, so nothing any different was needed, it always came easy.

        It always came easy for me, too, as a kid, even though myself I grew up in a broken home with subpar parenting.  I was lucky enough to have the right genes that made it easy to succeed academically.

        The purposes of reforms, whether they are good policy or not, are to produce greater academic success for kids for whom success comes hard, not easy.

        44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:14:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I get that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BeloitDem

          I wouldn't say things always came that easy for me; I worked very hard but definitely benefited by having highly educated parents and an older brother who also was (and is) very smart - and maybe especially, by a drive to excel. But I think kids need time to recharge, and families and teachers need time off, too. I could propose alternate structures for the school year, but that's policy, so I bow out here.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:39:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  time off (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, SLDemocrat

            Three months is too much to take off. Kids just forget a lot of stuff over the summer. Instead of a big block in the summer, they should space three-week breaks throughout the year.

            SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

            by sacman701 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:20:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sort of what I was thinking (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DCCyclone

              Where is it 3 months, though? In New York, it was always from July 1 to the day after Labor Day, ergo just a shade over 2 months.

              Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

              by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:34:19 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  In Oregon it's from about a week into June until (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, BeloitDem

                the first week of September.

                ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:40:28 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  It was 3 months when I was a kid, but... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                ...now that I have a daughter in elementary school, I've learned in Fairfax County these days it's about 2-and-one-half months, basically mid-June through Labor Day without school.

                When I was a kid in Iowa in the 70s and 80s, school ended before Memorial Day, but started in late August, and it was a full three months.

                I have no idea if these differences reflect national trends in my younger adulthood, or just local quirks.

                44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:20:09 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  In NY (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  It was always mid/late June ending and then starting the Wednesday after Labor Day.

                  I'm shocked other places had more time off.  3 consecutive months in summer is too much.  

                  "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                  by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:27:33 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Public school in New York City (0+ / 0-)

                    always ended on June 30 (unless that was a weekend). I remember that from high school. We had nothing at all to do on that day, but we were required to attend, anyway. Only when I was in private school did I get out in mid June.

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:48:27 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You didn't have field day (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY

                      We had a day of literally all outdoor activities called "Field Day" like it was the Olympics.  Quite a fun day of "school" even if I was the most out of shape unathletic kid out there.

                      "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                      by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:53:26 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I had that in private school (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Audrid

                        I don't remember whether I had that in public elementary school because my last year of public elementary school was 2nd grade. We did get taken to the sprinklers in the park often in June when it was really hot. I didn't go back to public school until high school, unless you include two years in Malaysia, where we did have field day every semester. In high school, we definitely had no field day because High School of Performing Arts had no gym and no phys ed classes.

                        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                        by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:17:30 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  We had that in elementary school too (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        MichaelNY

                        Both in South Carolina and Indiana.

                        24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

                        by HoosierD42 on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 09:11:58 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  It could be ag-related (0+ / 0-)

                    Iowa is the ultimate farm state, and while I'm just guessing, it wouldn't surprise me if farmers' labor needs dictated the school year generations back when much more of the population was tied to farms.  And then it just stuck.

                    I don't think it was "too much" of a break.  Iowa schoolchildren have always done as well academically as any.  So nothing was lost.

                    44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                    by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 05:30:50 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Lip service mostly. He'll be blocked by senate (4+ / 0-)

      that he helped set-up and then say "welp, I would have done it, but Republican senate blocked me".  

      President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:42:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Really don't think that will happen (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, dc1000, askew, lordpet8

        at least, not on the big initiatives.  Raising the minimum wage, for instance, is one of the IDC's big goals.  They won't get everything they want in this partnership, but they will get some things.  NY Senate Republicans have but one concern: staying in power.  They won't block votes on massively popular things like raising the minimum wage (which Quinnipiac found New Yorkers favor by a 78-20 margin, with even a majority of Republicans in favor).  And if a minimum wage increase goes to a vote, it will assuredly pass with all Dems and IDC in favor, and probably several Republicans as well.

        The NY senate Republicans have lost a few moderates, but they haven't gone totally insane yet.

        •  He'll get most everything (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, dc1000

          It's not like minimum wage, women's rights or climate change issues are that big a deal to fight against for the GOP.  Guns will be the most likely issue he;ll stumble on, but then again I really don't know what the end game is there anyways.  

          Of the stuff listed in your original embedded item, I'd imagine he'll get almost anything he wants.  Its all social stuff and that stuff isn't likely to cause the GOP to try and stand up to Cuomo and risk their power.  Then again, I'm not sure what their power really is if they constantly acquiesce to Democratic policies, but I've never tried to understand Dean Skelos before so I won't start now.

          "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

          by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:09:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I wouldn't be shocked if some gun control (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike

            passed the Senate. Some urban Republicans in this state are in favor of common-sense regulations.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:13:28 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I wouldn't either (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              But i doubt it will be anything ground-breaking.  Even if its just updating technology to track gun ownership or to do more thorough background checks, it's still something.  

              There's really nothing in the items laid out that's even controversial in NY, even when you factor in the bizarre political arrangement in the Senate.  It's not like the IDC is stupid, they're just jackarses.

              "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

              by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:24:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Important point (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            OGGoldy, R30A, itskevin, MichaelNY

            "Then again, I'm not sure what their power really is if they constantly acquiesce to Democratic policies"

            This is why I never got riled up about the GOP controlling the Senate.

          •  Someone described (7+ / 0-)

            the NY Senate GOP's priorities as such:

            1) Protect the Senate GOP majority

            2) Protect the Senate GOP majority

            3) Protect the Senate GOP majority

            ...etc.  They seem to kind of exist solely to stay in power.  I daresay they'd allow almost every progressive bill to pass into law if they at least get to keep their gerrymander.  It's a strange sort of power indeed.

    •  Cuomo talks a big game but.. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, LordMike

      usually doesn't walk the walk. I never was once to call him or thought of him as a fake Democrat like alot of his critics. In the past here on DKE I've spoke highly of him while reserving judgement. Since last month I've read alot of articles here on Dk and other left leaning sites and now see what other people see.

      He's a Democrat but is not as progressive as most would like to be. I saw some of his videos on YouTube when he makes great speeches like he did yesterday.

      At the end of the day Im hopeful he'll get through the gun legislation that he want to get through. And whether he's now starting to "see the light" is better he's doing it now rather than later.

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:46:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Big blue state governors (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        slacks

        Are always over-judged IMHO.  It's rare that the governor of a heavily Dem state of any size to be as progressive as outsiders think they should be, and most of the time it's a rather practical phenomenon (i.e. some Dem Govs can't do their agenda due to balanced budget requirements, etc).  I mean what has Mark Dayton, or Pat Quinn, or Peter Shumlin done?  What did John Lynch or Jen Granholm or Janet Napolitano do that was so progressive?

        But I still think Cuomo is judged way too harshly, and then O'Malley is given high praise when he does the same thing as Cuomo.  Cuomo gets higher taxes, they're not high enough, O'Malley gets higher taxes and he's a hero.  Cuomo rams through gay marriage, and he didn't do it fast enough, Maryland passes it O'Malley is a fave for 2016.

        When I think of the list of 2016 candidates and their ability to actually do progressive things (not just talk, but actually do), I just don't see how O'Malley or Tester or Gillibrand or Klobuchar or Warner have actually done anything better than Cuomo.  Instead people seem to blame him for some perception of reality that doesn't exist currently and never has.

        "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

        by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:15:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  not just big states (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Zack from the SFV

          Democratic governors in general tend to be moderate.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:24:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah (0+ / 0-)

            I through in acouple of small state governors, but I think the main point of my rant is "moderate compared to what"?

            Governors (and I suppose also mayors) are rewarded or derided over actual accomplishments, whereas congressional members are judged based on words more and action, a luxury not afforded governors/mayors.  

            When I see Kirsten Gillibrand going on the offensive for gay marriage nationally, or John tester pushing gun restrictions, or Mark Warner pushing hardcore for higher taxes on people making over $1 million per year, then i'll judge Cuomo harshly.  

            Until someone else can beat him in actually achieving something progressive (and not blaming gridlock or partisanship or some other BS) then I'll continue to see him as progressive.

            "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

            by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:46:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  The difference (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, Zack from the SFV

          is that Cuomo could be a lot more liberal if he had facilitated a Democratic majority in the Senate, instead of a Republican one. He prefers a less liberal Senate.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:53:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Except (0+ / 0-)

            You're not dealing with reality.  The Senate that he signed into law has only been in office for 9 days.  His first 2 years were with the old map because...well you know why that is.  

            So you've made up your mind based on:
            1.  the first 2 years of his term more progressive accomplishments than any other sitting Dem Guv had in their first 2 years
            2.  you seem to feel he was elected to be a liberal firebrand, when he neither marketed himself as such nor has ever been thought of as such
            3.  the GOP controlled-Senate you blame him for in the first 2 years of his term (which just as a reminder, were pretty f'ing progressive) was actually elected under a map he didn't draw because it was from the 2000's

            Think about your own position.  Why are you holding  Cuomo responsible for the NY State Senate from 2011-2012 elected under a previous map?  Why do you dismiss his accomplishments with a GOP controlled Senate from 2011-12?  Why are you damning his agenda due to a GOP Senate that's only been in place for 9 days?  Why do you think Cuomo should be more liberal than he's portrayed himself during campaigns?

            The lack of logic to this way of thinking is just bizarre.  If you had 45 democratic Senators in the last 9 days, what would have been different?    

            You'd need probably 40 Dem Senators to have Dem control and permanently elminate the IDC's impact, and then you'd have top assume that somehow the eternal upstate vs. donstate divide didn't exist on certain issues (i.e. gun control).

            "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

            by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:06:40 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I blame him (7+ / 0-)

              for his attitude toward Republicans controlling this Senate. Why you think that's unreasonable, I can't imagine, since his support for Republican control has been well documented.

              Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

              by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:19:55 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  What do you mean blame him (0+ / 0-)

                He gets what he needs from them.  He's not a liberal, and he's never tried to be.  A Democratic Senate wouldn't change that, so I'm not sure why people get hung up on that.

                None of his campaign or State of the State speeeches have him being some liberal firebrand.  And considering the general douchiness of a about 1/3 fo the Dem Senators, he'd probably get more out of working with the GOP anyways.  

                "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:34:03 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Are you saying he'd veto (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jncca, andgarden, Zack from the SFV

                  liberal legislation if a Democratic-controlled Senate passed it? And I blame him because he may not be a liberal, but he's a Democrat, and favoring Republican control of the Senate over Democratic control makes you not much of a Democrat.

                  Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                  by MichaelNY on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:45:25 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Nope (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    But then again the Senate, even when under Dem control for a short time wasn't putting forth huge liberal agenda items anyways.  They are a corrupt body no matter who is in charge.  

                    I mean everyone talks about minimum wage passing easily even with the GOP in charge...why hasnt a Dem or IDC member pushed this hard previously, especially from 2008-10.  

                    It seems like it's either Cuomo or Silver every time.

                    "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                    by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:54:44 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  you just saaid above that you see him (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  as progressive.  Now you say he's not a liberal and he's never tried to be.  Which is it?

                  ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                  by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:20:39 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I see him (0+ / 0-)

                    As more progressive than most other Dem governors.  But he's not a true progressive.  He's not liberal but has presided over a pretty progressive agenda. But at the end of the day he himself is not a liberal firebrand.

                    I can't find anywhere that I said Cuomo is a progressive.  Liberals can oversee moderate agendas and moderates can oversee progressive agendas and so on.  It doesn't change much about who he is; his successes so far are probably more to the left than even he sees himself.

                    "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                    by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:57:23 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  what you said (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY
                      Until someone else can beat him in actually achieving something progressive (and not blaming gridlock or partisanship or some other BS) then I'll continue to see him as progressive.
                      link

                      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                      by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:16:46 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

        •  well (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          there's the whole issue of campaigning for Republicans.

          20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
          politicohen.com
          Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
          UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

          by jncca on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:04:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Which ones? (0+ / 0-)

            I hope you're not referring to the ones whom he traded his support to in exchange for their gay marriage vote.

            That was pretty much a widely known deal (worth it) since so many of the precious downstate dems couldn't possibly vote for it, and since 3 of the 4 GOP Senators who did vote for it either retired or lost I wouldn't think Cuomo helped much.

            "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

            by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:12:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I thought there were others besides the (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, Zack from the SFV

              SSM ones.  If not I'm mistaken.  But there's definitely the fact that he signed a GOP gerrymander.  That's unforgivable to me.  

              20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
              politicohen.com
              Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
              UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

              by jncca on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:17:27 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  A 3% Republican district? (5+ / 0-)

    That's insane -- there, you literally could be the one and only Republican in your neighborhood!

  •  PVIs (5+ / 0-)

    NY-6 moves from D+12 to D+13
    NY-7 moves from D+31 to D+34
    NY-8 moves from D+33 to D+35
    NY-9 moves from D+31 to D+32
    NY-10 moves from D+24 to D+23 (BOO!)
    NY-11 moves from R+4 to R+2 (probably a mostly Sandy related move, but this is good for us nonetheless I suppose)
    NY-12 moves from D+28 to D+27 (BOO!)
    NY-13 moves from D+41 to D+42
    NY-14 moves from D+23 to D+26
    NY-15 moves from D+41 to D+43
    NY-16 moves from D+19 to D+21

    PA-2 moves from D+39 to D+38 (BOO!)
    PA-6 moves from R+1 to R+2 (BOO!)
    PA-13 moves from D+12 to D+14
    PA-15 stays at R+2.

    I suppose we might as well make a decent run in 2014 at Grimm given his scandals despite this time falling flat.

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:42:21 AM PST

  •  NY-St. Sen: So you're saying there's a chance... (14+ / 0-)

    A New York appeals court has ruled in favor of Democrat Cecilia Tkaczyk, who a lower court ruled had lost her State Senate race by only 37 votes. 99 contested votes, mostly from Democratic Ulster County, will now be counted.

    A comeback by Tkaczyk would give Democrats the nominal majority with 32 seats out of 63.

    http://www.lohud.com/...

    (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

    by TrueBlueDem on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:27:07 AM PST

  •  Follow up question from yesterday (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    I asked what majority minority county had the highest vote for Romney.  The answer, apparently, is Ochiltree County, Texas, where Romney surpassed 90%, despite non-hispanic whites narrowly missing a majority.

    http://factfinder2.census.gov/...
    http://uselectionatlas.org/...

    wwmiv justifiably objected to this, saying that he estimated the electorate there was probably close to 90% Anglo.  This led me to wonder, What location has the most Republican minority community?  South Florida has swung heavily to Dems lately, as the younger generation of Cubans are less tied to anti-Castro politics than their parents.  Perhaps it's some of the Five Nations communities in Oklahoma?  Or tribal areas in Alaska?  This isolated Native Hawaiian community in Niʻihau votes heavily GOP, so perhaps that's the answer, though it might be a bit small to qualify.  Can anyone tease out some other possibilities?

    •  Technically they're white, but (4+ / 0-)

      Heavily Orthodox Jewish areas like Borough Park in Brooklyn vote like 8-1 or 9-1 Romney.

      I would imagine though that if you limited South Florida to just Cubans and excluded other Hispanic groups like Dominicans and Venezuelans, you'll find they still voted very heavily Republican.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:11:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Interesting thing about the Cuban community (3+ / 0-)

        They nearly all identify as white, (as opposed to "some other race" that is often preferred by other hispanics).  The whitest city over 100,000 in American, according to the US Census, is actually Hialeah, FL, which is 92.6% white and 94.7% hispanic.

      •  Technically they're white (0+ / 0-)

        By 21st century American standards. They weren't always considered such. Remember folks, race is a social construct that changes over time.

        •  Incredibly lame put time (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sapelcovits

          The definition of race isn't...

          Black and white.

          •  Actually yes (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Audrid

            In the American construct it pretty much is, though with additional extra (more minor) categories.

            Ethnicity is a distinct concept which covers what Hattam calls "a different kind of difference" in her most recent text In the Shadow of Race: Jews, Latinos, and Immigrant Politics in the United States, although there is considerable literature that examines the possibility that Latinos are in a process of either race-ing themselves of being race-d by the Anglo majority.

            Basically, there's the black-white dynamic, with some smaller racial dynamics as well (Asians and also Native Americans, basically), but juxtaposed on top of that is the difference that exists between Jews and Latinos and the Anglo Whites (despite both Jews and Latinos being "racially" white). This is where we get the "different kind of difference".

            23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

            by wwmiv on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:24:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I love how wwmiv made that an academic discussion. (0+ / 0-)
            •  The point was more (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen

              About the modern American construction of race not being the only one. Southern Europeans didn't used to be considered white, and the they DO have a darker skin tone.

              Also, I'd argue that while the census classifies most Hispanics as white, sociologically we consider them a separate race right now.

              •  Yes... That's what I said. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                BeloitDem, MichaelNY

                However, Hattam goes into detail about how the construction of race changed during the 1880s because of Jewish academia. As this change occurred, all of these formerly non-white groups became white (Italians, Irish, Greeks, Spaniards, etc.), but there was still a form of difference: ethnicity. It was a cultural difference, instead of simply a skin tone difference.

                Hispanics up until about the 1960s really did consider themselves white. It was here, with Cesar Chavez and the sudden beginnings of massive immigration and reactionary tendencies that had always been beneath the surface (but hadn't bubbled up since the previous waves of mass migration from Europe) that Latinos began to race themselves and be race-d by Anglos within the context of American politics.

                Most non-American Latinos still consider themselves white.

                23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                by wwmiv on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:22:38 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  While the 1960s and Ceasar Chavez (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  Played a role in the development of Hispanic racialization, it wasn't the start of it. While what they've considered themselves has varied, Hispanics in America have never been considered whiter than Spanish by (who were considered non-white for a while along with other southern Europeans) by Anglos in America. Furthermore, they faced additional anti Native American bias in the early 20th century due to many of them having native blood. Hispanics have never really been clearly white sociologically in America, although obviously the situation is different than with African Americans.

                •  Many non-US Latinos (0+ / 0-)

                  consider themselves Mestizos or Mulatos.

                  Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                  by MichaelNY on Fri Jan 11, 2013 at 10:46:01 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Niihau (5+ / 0-)

      They aren't uniformly GOP. They almost all went for McCain in 2008, but they went overwhelmingly Dem for some other offices if I'm not mistaken. Apparently before elections most of them get together and decide how to vote.

      The island is entirely privately owned and most of the land is owned by one family, so if you want to visit you have to make arrangements with them.

      SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

      by sacman701 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:19:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  NJ-Sen: Booker leads Lautenberg by 22 (6+ / 0-)

    Fairleigh Dickinson, 42-20

    http://atr.rollcall.com/...

    27, NE-2 (resident), IL-9 (part-timer), SD-AL (raised); SSP and DKE lurker since 2007

    by JDJase on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:30:00 AM PST

  •  Romney was the Republican nominee in 2008? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Sorry, just a couple minor corrections in that post.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:33:17 AM PST

    •  If only... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone

      Obama would have won by at least 10 points.  Mr. Wall Street as the Republican nominee during the worst of the financial crisis would have been a gift that kept on giving.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:41:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, I disagree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sacman701, jncca

        I thought Romney would have been a stronger nominee in 2008 than in 2012 than McCain in some respects. Remember the financial meltdown didn't really get started until September (when Lehman Brothers failed) and I always thought Romney would have been able to sell his business experience to better effect that year than in 2012 when it was obvious that the plutocrats who caused the financial meltdown did not feel guilty at all about it, and Obama got to take some credit for an economic recovery.

        Also, even more than McCain, Romney would have likely been able to distance himself from Bush, since as Massachusetts governor he had little to do with Bush's foreign policy. Finally, Romney would have been able to run on his signature health care achievement in Massachusetts much more easily in 2008 than 2012, when it turned into (essentially) Obamacare. In fact, on almost every issue, Romney would have been given slack to take much more moderate positions than he was in 2012. No tea party back in 2008.

        Romney still would have lost, but he might have done better than McCain, anyway.

        •  Sorry, meant to say (0+ / 0-)

          "A stronger nominee than McCain."  (forget the than in 2012)

          Conversely, I think McCain would have likely been a stronger nominee than Romney in 2012.

        •  Romney was a better candidate than McCain (4+ / 0-)

          For the following reasons:

          1) He knew about domestic policy, McCain didn't. He could discuss it in detail, McCain couldn't.

          2) He was (and is) a much better communicator than McCain. Better speaker, better at expressing ideas (even if they were mostly bull).

          3) His pick for running mate, while still quite out there with loony Randroid beliefs, at least didn't come across as dangerously, proudly ignorant. In terms of policy there might not have been as much of a difference, but the politics were better.

          Also, the thing with Palin is that she essentially guaranteed McCain wouldn't win the election since too many people saw her as unfit and in turn saw McCain the same way. But she probably chipped away at Obama's margins by driving out disaffected conservatives. It's not necessarily illogical to say that Romney would have run a better campaign in 2008, and would have lost by more to Obama than McCain did. Once Palin was picked, McCain lost the election. With Romney-Pawlenty, say, the chance might have been 5% of their winning, but it wouldn't have been around 0%.

        •  I think these are weak arguments (6+ / 0-)

          The fact is Romney was a weaker candidate in 2008 than in 2012, he got better in debates and otherwise over 4 years, and so the 2008 Romney would've fared much worse by his own mouth.

          And Romney already veered hard right in 2008 for the primaries then, even before teabaggers organized a year later after Obama won, so that was going to kill him in November.  He embraced all the same positions, including on foreign policy, as the neocons, which again was going to kill him.

          Romney's business background was as easily exploited then as now for weaknesses...after all, the Bain stuff already was successfully used against him in 1994.  Romney would've been more easily attacked for his ties to the very crowd causing the crash, it was obvious to ordinary voters in 2008 that "the plutocrats" were responsible for the crash.  After all, that's why the big bailout was so controversial, it seemed to many people to amount to saving the very culprits, with the victims' money.

          And Romney was no more distant from Bush than McCain.  Again, see above on foreign policy, Romney wrapped himself around support for the wars.

          And health care was not going to help him because it wasn't important to voters.  Obama ran on health care because it was (and still is) a core issue in Democratic primaries, not in the general election.

          On top of all this, McCain was a respected figure for his long public service and his war heroism.  Romney had nothing so redeeming in the eyes of any bloc of voters.

          I agree with sawolf, Obama would've beaten Romney by more than he beat McCain.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:14:49 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree with pretty much all of this (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, DCCyclone, James Allen

            and would have said it myself earlier if I hadn't been busy.

            People tend to forget that McCain actually had strong favorables on election day, despite picking Sarah Palin, despite being a Republican, despite "the fundamentals of the economy are strong."  Romney was underwater when his party was basically at parity with Dems and without Dems going nuclear over Paul Ryan.  The guy would have been absolutely routed by Obama in 2008 and would have been the embodiment of everything wrong with Wall Street.  I don't think a 15 point win would have been totally out of the question and it would have been 10 points minimum.

            In fact I think Obama would have carried every state he won in reality, plus Arizona, Alaska, Missouri, Montana, maybe Georgia and South Carolina too and maybe even the Dakotas.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

            by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:23:09 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think you're exactly right (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              NMLib

              Your point on favorables is key, I didn't think of that, but it's exactly right.

              And everything people disliked about Romney this time would've been a much more amplified problem in 2008.

              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 06:28:46 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Everyone forgets what a strong candidate (5+ / 0-)

          McCain was; I think a lot of liberals tended to overlook it at the time, in fact. He maintained quite high favorables right through election day, despite being from the same party as the epically unpopular president at the time. He had that whole media-fluffed maverick reputation; he was a war hero; he even had occasional bouts of integrity. He was easily the strongest candidate the republicans could put up.

          Romney, meanwhile, was openly mocked by other republicans during their 2008 primary debates; he fought tooth and nail to win out in 2012 against a galley of fools; and he had quite low favorables straight through the election. And if being associated with vulture capitalism was a liability for him in 2012, what would it have been in the immediate aftermath of the financial meeltdown?

          As for "moderate positioning," McCain did take moderate positions, relative to the post-2010 republicans; he supported cap and trade, for god's sake.

          There's not a chance in the universe Romney would have been stronger than McCain.

          •  Romney isn't a shadow of McCain (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            He would have been thrashed in 2008.  He literally has no advantage over Mccain, except for being Mormon in utah.

            Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

            by tommypaine on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:17:49 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  McCain may have blown his advantages... (0+ / 0-)

            ... in the end, McCain's margins among the groups you'd expect him to do well in - independents, blue states, etc. - was horrible. It's hard to see Romney doing a lot worse. Between McCain's September meltdown, the Palin pick, and his poor financing, he just couldn't capitalize on his favorability ratings.

            In the end, I'm not sure Romney would have done much worse if at all than McCain. I'd actually suspect they'd have done roughly the same. Maybe Romney would have done marginally worse in the EC - Obama could probably have taken Missouri and Arizona. But in the popular vote, I think it'd be about the same.

            The more interesting question is who would the GOP then nominate in 2012? Tim Pawlenty? Paul Ryan? Chris Christie?

          •  I don't think McCain was a strong candidate at all (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, bumiputera

            In fact, he showed himself to be very erratic, from his Palin pick to his suspension of his campaign during the financial meltdown. He never had a single good moment after he was chosen as nominee (whereas Romney had one - the first debate). I think the idea of McCain as a candidate was much stronger than the reality.

            But I think DCCyclone makes pretty good arguments against my position - in particular, I was unaware that Romney had embraced a neoconservative foreign policy in 2008 (hard to believe, given how descredited that position would have been by then).

            I think Romney would have been a more stable appearing candidate than McCain, and better able to seem like a potential president. That doesn't mean, however, I think he would have been a good candidate. He was still Romney, he still would have lost. In fact, I don't think any Republican, even Reagan, could have beaten Obama in 2008.

            I certainly admire McCain more than Romney, but let's not forget what a lousy candidate he was in 2008. For Palin alone, he should be ridiculed. (yeah, I know, she energized the base, but there likely would have been a better way of doing that than turning off the center. Not to mention how completely irresponsible it was to ever consider somewhat like that to be heartbeat away from the presidency).

            •  I wonder who Romney would have picked (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              If you assume he wouldn't have picked McCain (not for any reason, just to make the conversation more fun), who else does Romney consider for VP in 2008.

              "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

              by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:21:41 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  This is what I'm talking about... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sawolf, MichaelNY, James Allen

              The whole "McCain the Erratic" storyline is the way liberals saw him - because we were inclined to see him in a negative light, and this was a plausible way to frame him. But if it was actually a harmful image to the general population, his favorability would have been a lot lower.

              And of course whoever the Republican nominee was in 2008 would have been seen in a negative light by liberals - Romney would have been the out-of-touch fat cat, as we all thought of him in 2012; Giuliani would have been the bellicose jingoist bully, etc.) - and any one of them would have been thrashed by Obama. And so we all would have thought they were lousy candidates for the reasons that we thought they sucked. But they were just all destined to lose regardless.

              •  McCain got somewhat of a pass (0+ / 0-)

                For being erratic I mean.  Being erratic by picking Palin or by temporarily suspending his campaign isn't exactly earth-shaking.  It's not somethign really major to the common man.

                He looked less presidential because of Palin but that just made people less likely to vote for him with her at his side, they were'nt necessarily less likely to approve or favor him (whichever the poll asked).  I doubt most people even remembered he suspended his campaign by the time they voted.

                But you're right about everything else, Obama was going to win in a landslide; then again any of us would have won too :-)

                "What if you're on a game show one day and the name of some random New Jersey state senator is the only thing between you and several thousand dollars? And you'll think to yourself, "if only I had clapped faster." - sapelcovits

                by rdw72777 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:59:59 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  McCain (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen

              He was probably the best candidate the GOP had in terms of general election appeal, but he ran a bad campaign.

              I think if the financial crisis had broken earlier in the year Romney would have won the nomination ("I'm a businessman! I know how to fix this!") but his campaign probably would have been even more erratic than it was this year. The one plus he would have had is that he almost certainly would have picked someone better than Sarah Palin. I don't think Ryan was a good pick, but he wasn't blatantly unqualified like Palin was. Ultimately I think he would have lost by a point or two more than McCain did, losing the same states plus MO and AZ.

              SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

              by sacman701 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:50:12 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Obama got 81% in NYC, the best showing (10+ / 0-)

    for a presidential candidate in 114 years.

    Some of this may be a Sandy effect, but still. He got 79% in 2008, and Gore got 78% in 2000.

    The only borough where his support slipped from 08: Manhattan, from 86% to 84%.

    •  I was looking at (4+ / 0-)

      Ashland's results from 2008 and found that his worst precinct was 80%, his best were around 88%, and it got me wondering what other small exurban cities like that (<50k) existed.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:10:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  and re our conversation yesterday (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        while it is a city and not a county (population roughly 20,250), it is 87.6% white by total population, and was 85.76% Obama in 2008.

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:34:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Missoula isn't exurban (0+ / 0-)

        but perhaps it could fit into the same category as Ashland as a little granola oasis in a desert of gun-toting, individualist conservatism. Quite a few of these small communities exist out west that aren't completely dependent on tourism or universities.

  •  Before I go mapping it out (0+ / 0-)

    does anyone have any of the new CDs mapped out with block groups, not voting districts, on DRA?

    NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

    by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:07:43 AM PST

  •  California legislature committees decided: (5+ / 0-)

    Senate: http://blogs.sacbee.com/...
    Republicans lose their chairmanship on the Ag Committee to Cathleen Galgiani, who narrowly won a San Joaquin County district.

    Assembly: http://blogs.sacbee.com/...

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:55:29 AM PST

    •  looks like the term limits ensure (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      a decent amount of freshman get to chair committees.

      "Unfortunately when the Republican party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. " — Virginia Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)

      by lordpet8 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:16:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Galgiani served three terms in the Assembly (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lordpet8, MichaelNY

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:28:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  true just that she's new to the senate (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades, MichaelNY

          John Perez got to be speaker as a freshman due to the fact the old term limit law really screwed things in the legislature. When you finally built up enough seniority and experince for the job, you were already on your way out of the chamber due to term limits (perpetuating and endless cycle of limited experience in the legislature)

          My new assemblyman, Jose Medina, also managed to score a chairmanship.

          "Unfortunately when the Republican party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. " — Virginia Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)

          by lordpet8 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:40:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What a mess (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            At least the term limits thing got a minor fix when they adjusted it so that you can serve 12 years as you like (up to 6 Assembly or up to 3 Senate terms).

            Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

            by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:59:57 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's an improvement (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, KingofSpades, lordpet8

              The old law was a parting shot from the GOP, back when they were in their term limits phase. Then Dan Lungren got his clock cleaned when he ran for governor, and it was all over for 'em.

              So surreal to think that he was the state's AG for eight years. I went to school with his campaign manager's son.

  •  Working on a gerrymander on the Indiana House (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drhoosierdem, HoosierD42

    and it was not that easy, without getting ridiculous. The best I could get was 15 Solid Dem, 19 Likely Dem, 12 Lean Dem, 10 Tossup, 2 Likely GOP, 44 Solid GOP. This is without drawing Indy seats into the suburbs (other than a couple of GOP seats). However, I had to drop the black majority seats in Marion and Lake counties below 50%. Based on the old map, I eliminated the GOP held District 15 which was southern Lake County, Benton and Newton Counties, and part of White County- moved to Boone County, District 62, which was Orange, and parts of Greene, Lawrence, Martin, and Washington Counties- moved to northern Morgan and Johnson Counties. I also moved District 87 into Hamilton County. Some of the work was creative, such as getting three Dem seats out of Terre Haute, Bloomington, Muncie, Anderson, and Evansville. Under the GOP map, all these have only one Dem. I left two Dem seats in Ft. Wayne, but could have tried for three. Four Dem seats in South Bend, eight in Lake County, and 11 in Marion County. My favorite seat is my District 30, which links Kokomo to Logansport and is 54% Obama in 2008. This sure does beat the 69-31 minority we are in now.

    "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

    by SouthernINDem on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:22:48 AM PST

    •  I also drew (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HoosierD42

      HD-70 to exclude 5 strongly Republican precincts in Harrison County and then join it with Crawford and Perry Counties. This would make it very difficult for Rep. Rhoads to be reelected. However, I draw a GOP vote sink from precincts in Harrison, Washington, Floyd and Clark Counties. I also did what Dems never did- put Clarksville with New Albany, and not create their own vote sink in Jeffersonville.

      Sout

      "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

      by SouthernINDem on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 12:28:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  IL-03, Open Seat Watch (24+ / 0-)

    The Chicago Tribune is floating the possibility of Dan Lipinski being named Ambassador to the Holy See.

    I'm tentatively in favor -- it sounds like Lipinski wants the job, the Vatican would like him, it's a position that really can't go to a progressive, and most importantly it gets his annoying Blue Dog ass out of Congress.

    The Trib concern-trolls a bit about a "strong Republican challenge" in a hypothetical, but this is still a D+ district, and the Republican brand is very weak in Illinois right now.

  •  ....Clearly (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    the voters of NJ are ready for a fresh face in the U.S. Senate.

  •  Gee... (12+ / 0-)

    Mark Warner is only beating the strongest possible Republican in the state by 10 points, I don't know, but I think it's time to panic!

    Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

    by NMLib on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:46:53 AM PST

  •  MA-SEN: Barney Frank endorses Ed Markey (6+ / 0-)

    link.

    •  At this point there is zero reason for Patrick (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, jj32

      to not appoint Markey.  The whole point of having an early special election is so that the voters get to decide on who to nominate, but with everying including the DSCC endorsing Markey they might as well have just anointed him Senator.

      When is the last time a sitting member of congress endorsed by the DSCC before primary day lost the primary, Lieberman?

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:32:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  there is the state law (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        and Markey would have to sue to be able to be appointed and also run.  Sure I think it's unconstitutional, but still, he may not think its worth it if it means he'll have to sue.

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:22:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wait, what state law? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, Zack from the SFV

          The law actually forbids the placeholder from running? I've seen people say that but never have seen that confirmed anywhere.

          Also, Patrick was very clear in his reason for not wanting the interim appointment to go to someone running in the special: It's almost impossible to do a decent job in the Senate while waging a hyperkinetic four-month campaign for a statewide job. (Of course, Markey would still have to worry about his House job, but that's out of Patrick's control.)

          Honestly, I think Markey would be better off not getting named to the Senate. Plus, he may not even want it: If he were to run for Senate and somehow lose, he'd still keep his House seat. But if he gets the appointment, he'd have to resign from the House.

          Get the Daily Kos Elections Digest in your inbox every weekday. Sign up here.

          by David Nir on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:28:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Frank apparently also said he (0+ / 0-)

      doesnt think Capuano will get into the race.

  •  George W Bush Protection Act is now law (4+ / 0-)

    The Secret Service gets to return to Crawford, TX. Don't you know how thrilled they must be?

    On Thursday, January 10, 2013, the President signed into law:

    H.R. 6620, the "Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012," which restores lifetime Secret Service protection of former Presidents who did not serve as President prior to January 1, 1997, and their spouses; and provides for protection of all children of former Presidents until they become 16 years of age;

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/...

    Filibuster reform now. No more Gentleman's agreements.

    by bear83 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 12:41:28 PM PST

  •  Paul Krugman, for once, smart on politics (8+ / 0-)

    Here is the link, re politics of the platinum coin and debt ceiling default:  http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/...

    I see Krugman as a rule as someone brilliant on economics, but not very smart on politics.

    Here, I think he gets it right.

    The key paragraph, in my mind:

    Second, if you’re going to have an epic political confrontation of this particular kind — that is, one that can inflict vast damage until somebody blinks — having it just a few weeks into a new Congress doesn’t seem optimal.  Even if the confrontation causes voters to recognize GOP extremists for what they are, and a tidal wave of revulsion builds, it will be almost 2 years before we can change the cast of characters — and also 2 years for the crazies to try to spin the story differently.
    That's just it, it's a long time for the GOP to spin and advertise its way out of the hole, enough time to perhaps succeed, and the media, as Krugman explains in his subsequent paragraph that I didn't blockquote, will help them with a massive dose of false equivalance.

    Much of what happens toward the beginning of a new Congress simply doesn't matter at all in the ensuing midterms.  Voters have short memories, and spin can take hold.

    Still, you gotta try to win on not just the merits but also the politics of an issue for the next election no matter how far out it is.

    I think, and certainly hope, Obama and his team are ready to put together a message that wins in the court of public opinion on the debt ceiling.  The argument is there on the merits, so the message can be crafted.

    44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

    by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:25:57 PM PST

    •  Agree on all counts. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone
    •  Unfortunately I think the public will end up (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      giving Republicans a pass.  I was blown away by Republicans actually passing the Ryan Plan in spring of 2011 since it was clearly meant to appeal to the base (and more importantly financial base) but it should have been absolutely toxic to run against.  Yet here we are, two months after the election and Republicans still held on fairly easily to R+3 or greater seats where you'd think enough Republicans actually like Medicare...

      I've basically come to the view that our country will just have institutionalized dysfunction until at least 2022 if not for the foreseeable future.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:38:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  IL-03 ? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    geoneb

    I thought they purposely drew that district to be two conservative for a progressive Dem but safe for Lipinski.  It is in the heart of Chicago after all, so the 56-43 Obama number may be a bit inflated.  I'm sure we could win with a progressive Dem here - but Republicans might be able to make it competitive and I'm not sure if that's something we want in a special election.

    •  It was drawn to fend off a primary challenge, yes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      Which doesn't necessarily mean it'll be harder for a progressive Dem to beat a Republican, just harder for that progressive to win the primary in the first place. The district is a lot of old-school conservative Catholic Dems, IIRC.

    •  It might be inflated a bit (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      But it's a fair bet John Kerry and Al Gore carried this district by decent margins.  Republicans aren't very well represented anymore in districts that have been voting Dem for president for 20 years now consistently.  In fact, I don't believe Republicans represent a single congressional district in the entire country that went for Gore, Kerry, and Obama both times.  The Obama-won seats they do hold tend to be districts with recent blue shifts, yet voted for Bush.  Not IL-03.

      •  It's been D+5 for each of the last three cycles nt (0+ / 0-)

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:52:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Dave Reichert's seat went to the Dems (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        in every election From Bill Clinton to Obama

        http://en.wikipedia.org/...

        so there are still a few holdouts

        "Unfortunately when the Republican party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. " — Virginia Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)

        by lordpet8 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:05:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DCCyclone

          And he won it again this year as well. It's currently R+1. We'll win that damned seat someday.

          23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

          by wwmiv on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 04:03:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  The current version of the seat (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lordpet8, DCCyclone

          would have been won handily by Bush, both times.  The old WA-08 went 57% Obama (2008), but redistricting cut it down to 51% Obama (2008).  Kerry and Gore only won the old WA-08 by a few points.

          PA-06 (Jim Gerlach) is a similar story.  It went 58% Obama in 2008, but was gerrymandered down to 53% (and Obama actually managed to lose it this year).  Gore and Kerry won the old version, but Bush would have easily won it under the current lines.

          Back to back wave years, plus increased polarization, and definitely redistricting removing most of the competitive GOP seats has led to this phenomenon where, under current lines, Bush would have won every single district held by a Republican today.

          •  Kerry won PA-08 (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Skaje

            but that's it.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

            by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 04:31:00 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  *slaps head* (0+ / 0-)

              forgot about PA-08.  In my first post, I was technically correct because I said districts that have voted Gore-Kerry-Obama-Obama (Romney narrowly won it this year, but Kerry would have won the current version by about 1%), but then I forgot the second part in my next post.

          •  I believe this is significant because (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen

            while Bush was actually president, a whole bunch of Republicans represented Gore/Kerry seats, such as Reichert, Gerlach, Mark Kirk, Mike Castle, the three Connecticut Republicans (Shays, Simmons, and Johnson), Clay Shaw, Jim Leach, Anne Northup, Charlie Bass, Heather Wilson, and others.  They've all been defeated, promoted, gerrymandered into GOP seats, or otherwise no longer representing districts Bush couldn't win.

    •  it's not the "heart of Chicago" per se (0+ / 0-)

      and ironically Obama probably overperformed less in the city anyway because Dem numbers are mostly maxed out.

      Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

      by sapelcovits on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:45:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  California now has a budget surplus! (10+ / 0-)

    according to Jerry Brown.

    •  I know it's policy, but do you have a link? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Finally, some hope for the state.  No more budget showdowns to strangle the state.

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:51:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here ya go (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades

        27, NE-2 (resident), IL-9 (part-timer), SD-AL (raised); SSP and DKE lurker since 2007

        by JDJase on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:37:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  here's a link (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

        Basically I think we no longer having deficits each year, we still need to eliminate our debt(but that looks much easier now)

        Throws a wrench in all the naysayers about our budget problems. Heck I even saw that state Republicans are supporting a bill to freeze fee hikes in Universities for 7 years (one can only wonder why they didn't try to do this before the election).

        "Unfortunately when the Republican party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. " — Virginia Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)

        by lordpet8 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:52:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Not all policy (5+ / 0-)
        Despite the new revenue flowing in, Brown has warned his Democratic colleagues who control both houses of the Legislature that they must not overplay their hand and spend too freely. The governor wants to build a reserve fund for future downturns to help smooth the type of boom-and-bust budget cycles that have become chronic in California.
        It's now up to the Dem legislature to not be as fundamentally stupid as they have in the past.  The way CA gets its money is still hugely dependant on the real estate market, so any longterm spending that just assumes home prices will not go down further is fiscal insanity.

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:56:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I hope dems do the following (5+ / 0-)

          1. Pay off the state debt

          2. Create a rainy day fund

          3. Refund the universities and bring down student fees

          "Unfortunately when the Republican party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. " — Virginia Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)

          by lordpet8 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:08:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Brown is right (0+ / 0-)

          What your blockquote says he wants is, in fact, liberal Keynesian economics.

          It's what Keynes himself always envisioned.

          I hope Brown holds firm.  California has a chance to be truly a model of good government liberalism for the nation by doing so.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:41:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Jindal eliminating income/corporate taxes (6+ / 0-)

    Raising sales taxes. LINK HERE

    I won't get into the horrible public policy this is, but it matters in legislative races and Mary Landrieu's race.

    Democrats need to run on Longist, old school democratic populist messaging to win here.

    I know EWE is busy impregnating his wife and doing a reality show, but I'd love nothing more him leading the charge in the 2015 legislative races

    23, Male, LA-02, TX-08 (originally), SSP: sschmi4

    by Stephen Schmitz on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 01:34:11 PM PST

    •  What the hell?? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, psychicpanda, DCCyclone

      The guy is 85 years old and he just married a woman in her early 30s.  That image just gives me the creeps.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

      by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:44:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not to get too much into policy (5+ / 0-)

      but this kind of stuff just confuses me:

      Jindal said the plan would be revenue-neutral and that the goal would be to keep sales taxes "as low and flat as possible."

      ...

      "Eliminating personal income taxes will put more money back into the pockets of Louisiana families"

      I don't even understand what kind of math he's doing.  How he can claim that it will be revenue neutral but somehow Louisiana families will have more money.  And sales taxes will stay "as low as possible" while having to make up for the complete loss of all income and corporate tax revenue.  I just don't get it.

      But you're right, if Democrats are going to make a comeback in Louisiana, it will be by running hard against these "tax the poor, coddle the rich" plans being pushed by Republicans.

      •  I guess LA citizens will travel (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        to states without sales tax to buy stuff, and people from the rest of the country will come to LA to buy stuff.

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:25:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oregon? (0+ / 0-)

          Kind of a long drive.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:26:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I thought they carded people (0+ / 0-)

            to make sure they were from Oregon

            "Unfortunately when the Republican party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. " — Virginia Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)

            by lordpet8 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 04:07:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  In Oregon? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              lordpet8

              No.  There's no sales tax here, unless you're buying booze or cigarettes or gas, or perhaps some other particular item that I don't know about, and in and out of staters pay the same for everything but tuition.

              ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

              by James Allen on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 04:19:41 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Maybe you are thinking of (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JohnnyBoston, lordpet8

              WA. We card people who claim they are from Oregon, as they get to shop sales tax free in our state.

              Age 24, Republican, WA-03 (represented by wonderful Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler)

              by KyleinWA on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 06:05:13 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  What industries they have in Louisiana (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      that's more than enough to not have state income tax? I don't think tourism to New Orleans, and oil drilling is enough. Louisiana is already at the bottom of the barrel.

      If the time LADEMS to make a comeback it would be now. Last time I check Landrieu is more popular Jindal. And his numbers are slipping, if I'm not mistaken.

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:40:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Eddie Edwards is the new King Henry VIII. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:47:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Edwin Washington Edwards (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera

        Charismatic powerhouse, former multi-term Governor of Louisiana, staunch Democrat, and went to jail on corruption charges (allegations of which didn't sink his final campaign) before he was released two years ago.  It's a shame he was such a crook.  He was quite progressive, even on civil rights.  In his last Gubernatorial election (against David Duke, former Imperial Wizard of the KKK), he embraced his corruption allegations (corruption is common in LA, but he was honest about it) with bumper stickers that said "Vote for the Lizard, Not the Wizard."  And when asked what he has in common with David Duke, he said: "We're both a wizard under the sheets."

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 06:19:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I believe what Schmitz wants (0+ / 0-)

          is to have ol' Eddie Edwards stump for Dems in key races down there, set a campaign focus, and help give them back their spark.  He's so charismatic and folksy that he's nigh impossible to dislike.

          Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

          by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 06:23:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Blue Dog coalition members (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    James Allen, MichaelNY

    After the last election and P Gallego joining the coalition, I was expecting 15 member for the 113th congress.

    But in the Wikipedia resume I see now 13 members only.

    It is right? S Bishop and A Schiff are out the coalition now?

  •  Even if Bolling (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, jj32, lordpet8, jncca

    was just talking about gubernatorial races, it would still be shockingly wrong. Henry Howell came within a couple of points of winning the VA Governorship as an independent in the early 1970s, IIRC.

  •  OH-Gov (12+ / 0-)

    Sutton considering a run:

    http://www.cleveland.com/...

    I've seen it speculated that she would consider it, but this is the first official reporting. Definitely my favorite of all the names mentioned.

    A liberal knows that the only certainty in this life is change but believes that the change can be directed toward a constructive end.--Henry Wallace

    by 54cermak on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:14:50 PM PST

  •  Funny you had to point out the name "Champ" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    since I thought the same about the name "Erin"--I haven't heard of anyone named Erin in Congress yet, and an Erin Bilbray was highlighted like one story above, yesterday.

  •  VA-Gov (4+ / 0-)

    Independent Henry Howell got 49% of the vote in 1973, although he was the de facto Democratic Party candidate since the Democrats didn't run anyone that year.

  •  IL-18 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, KingofSpades, MichaelNY, LordMike

    The Jobs & Progress Fund, a Tea Party front group that I don't know much about, is attacking GOP Rep. Aaron Schock for "voting for the biggest tax increase in half a century", and Schock's lawyer, John Fogarty, Jr., is calling for the ads to be pulled from the airwaves!

    Progressive activist and lifelong resident of Vermilion County, Illinois IL-15/IL-SD-52/IL-HD-104

    by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:26:32 PM PST

  •  How to not appeal to swing voters (7+ / 0-)
    Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, the presumptive GOP gubernatorial nominee and a rising national figure on the right, told an Iowa-based radio show Wednesday night that opponents of a federal mandate for contraception coverage should be willing to “go to jail” to fight the law./blockquote>

    http://www.politico.com/...

    20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
    politicohen.com
    Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
    UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

    by jncca on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:28:13 PM PST

  •  NC-07 (8+ / 0-)

    I'm not so sure that McIntyre will have a harder time winning without Obama on the ballot - it seems Obama made it harder on a lot of Blue Dogs this year - in fact, many of them had tougher races than in 2010.   (Because of the high number of people voting straight Republican.)

    Here's a quick analysis.   The 7th district can be split into two parts:   The "Demosaur" counties, Columbus, Bladen, Sampson, and Duplin, are McIntyre's base.  Only one of those four actually voted for Obama - Bladen by a very small margin, but McIntyre racks up huge margins in Columbus and Bladen - always thirty points or more - and he wins Sampson and Duplin, though not by as much.

    Then the second part of the district:  Brunswick, New Hanover, Pender, and the new county - Rouzer's home - Johnston.  All of these used to be "Demosaur" counties just a few decades ago, but they have had huge population growth in the last decade or two.  (Brunswick is near the top of the list for fastest growing counties in the US).  All are typical suburban Republican counties and are less willing to vote for Democrats, even conservative Democrats (New Hanover is 50-50 politically but the Democratic areas of the county have been removed from the 7th district).

    In 2010 and 2012, McIntyre's performance was pretty stable in the rural counties - about 65% in Columbus and Bladen, less in Sampson & Duplin.  He improved in Brunswick by a bout 5 points, and New Hanover (what parts of it are left) by 10 points.  There may have been a  primary effect here - Ilario Pantano was from Wilmington and he lost the primary to Rouzer.  Also, the redistricting plan was very unpopular with Wilmington-area voters because it split Southeastern NC.  So there were more than a few "protest votes" for McIntyre from Republicans here.

    The good news is, the Democratic voter turnout drop-off will not be very pronounced in the "suburban" counties because they are only about 15-20% minority.  In the rural counties, McIntyre should do better due to Obama not being on the ballot - he has gotten 80% in some of them in the past, I say he should aim to get 70% or more.

    The one thing McIntyre must do, though, is not to alienate liberal Democrats too much in this session.  He has done next to nothing to appease them in the past and I would say most Democrats in New Hanover County (where I'm from) despise him, but vote for him anyway because he's ALWAYS better than the opponent (Rouzer and Pantano were real nuts.)  I don't think he'd be vulnerable to a primary but if there was a concentrated effort on a write in or third party campaign as there was in the 8th District this year against Larry Kissell, McIntyre would be a goner - especially if the margin was anywhere near as close as it was in 2012.

  •  WATN IL-17: Bobby Schilling's gone full wingnut: (4+ / 0-)

    https://twitter.com/...

    Typical liberal hypocrite! Love of money, only when it's theirs! http://fb.me/...
    The FB link is broken.  I guess he took down whatever it linked to.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 03:51:11 PM PST

  •  Odd possibility (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Audrid

    What if Sen. Schumer is threatening to torpedo the Hagel nomination unless President Obama puts Sen. Durbin in his Cabinet, i.e. out of Schumer's way for leadership after Sen. Reid hangs it up?

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:05:09 PM PST

    •  I wonder what would be a good post for Durbin. (0+ / 0-)

      And I just realized that it would be a problem if someone like Alexi G ran for the seat.

      •  Even he would probably win (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Audrid, SaoMagnifico

        it took a perfect storm for Kirk to eke out a plurality win with the Green party playing spoiler (GOP + Lib > Dem + Green).

        I doubt he could win the primary again though as he only won with a small plurality and that was before a huge stink was made of his ethics issues, Hoffman tried unsuccessfully but I think part of his lack of appeal was his more moderate image.

        Plus Quinn isn't fucking golden insane and won't appoint Roland Burris.  I'd almost rather this happened since I think Schumer will be a much more effective caucus leader than Durbin.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.12, -8.62; Yellow Dog Democrat

        by sawolf on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:13:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Labor, which just opened up... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pistolSO

        Or Transportation, which is likely to open up.

        Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

        by SaoMagnifico on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:54:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I don't like that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JBraden

      To have another appointed Senator from Illinois again. Just look what happened with the other Illnois senate seat. Even though Im confident we'll get that seat back in '16. That reason number one.

      Second reason is assuming whom Quinn will pick. Most of the senoir Dems in the Illinois are no spring chickens, and are past the age treshold when it comes to running for the senate. Schakowsky for example will be 69 in May. If she ran back for the '10, she would had just met the threshold. 4 years can make a HUGE difference. MHO he'll probably choose his Lieutenant, Sheila Simon. Which would be fitting that she's sitting in her father's old seat. But I would rather see Bustos and Duckworth have some years under their belt in the House and run for the two seats.

      Third reason is I don't think Durbin will take it, and will run for re-election. I think he retire in 2020 cause it has been known for sometime that Schumer is much more likely to be the Dem Senate leader after Reid. His stint as DSCC chair in '06 and '08 helped him alot, and he has more loyalty from those Senator that were in elected and re-elected in those cycles.

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:29:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I really hope not n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  Another preview of my Illinois map in progress (0+ / 0-)

    Il-13 contains the blue parts of Springfield, Decatur, Bloomington, Champaign, AND Danville.  It's about D+3.

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:31:08 PM PST

    •  My IL-12 is 55.9% Obama 2008 (0+ / 0-)

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 07:32:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  that likely makes it EVEN or R+1 this time (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
        politicohen.com
        Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
        UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

        by jncca on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 12:12:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  WI-Gov (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades

    Yesterday, David Nir mentioned that a group of local activists in Wisconsin are trying to encourage Peter Barca to run for Governor of Wisconsin in 2014, after I brought that to the attention of DKErs in the comments section of the previous day's Live Digest.

    Actually, according to Chris (no last name given), a commenter on this blog post by Lisa Mux, the author of the progressive blog Waukesha Wonk, the Draft Barca Facebook group was originally started over a year ago to convince Barca to run in the 2012 WI-Gov recall election, and, after Barca declined to run in the recall election and Walker survived the recall attempt against him, the organizers of the Draft Barca movement decided to change the stated goal of the Draft Barca Facebook group to convince Barca to mount a 2014 WI-Gov run, and, since DKE has mentioned the Draft Barca Facebook group, several people have since been added to the group.

    Progressive activist and lifelong resident of Vermilion County, Illinois IL-15/IL-SD-52/IL-HD-104

    by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:09:17 PM PST

    •  Isn't Barca a former member of the US House? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DownstateDemocrat, MichaelNY
      •  Yes, he is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Barca represented WI-1 for 3/4 of a term back in the mid-1990s. Barca defeated Republican Mark Neumann in a 1993 special election in WI-1 that was triggered by Les Aspin resigning to take the Defense Secretary's post. Neumann ran against Barca again in the 1994 WI-1 general election, and Neumann defeated Barca in a bad year for Democrats nationally. Both elections were decided by less than 2,000 votes.

        WI-1 was more Democratic back in the 1990's than it is now, and would be a true swing district today...the 90's WI-1 included all of Rock, Walworth, Racine, and Kenosha counties, the eastern half of Green County, two small sections of southern Jefferson County, and one small section of south-central Waukesha County. I drew the 90's WI-1 on DRA as best as I could (probably not exact, but I got it very close), and it's a 56% Obama 2008/45% Democratic Average 2010 district (the 2010 Dem Average for WI on DRA consists of the average Democratic numbers for the 2010 WI-Gov and 2010 WI-Sen races).

        Progressive activist and lifelong resident of Vermilion County, Illinois IL-15/IL-SD-52/IL-HD-104

        by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:59:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site