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.

9:45 AM PT: MT-Sen: What's this all about? At the very end of a short item on PPP's new poll showing ex-Gov. Brian Schweitzer would defeat Sen. Max Baucus in a hypothetical Democratic primary, KPAX's Marnee Banks tosses out this bomb:

[Schweitzer] did however say he would have big news for us in the next week or so. In the meantime he is at his place on Georgetown Lake snowmobiling and putting logs on the fire.
Say what? Big news? What could it be? Well, if he's creating some new foundation or something like that, then grr. That's not "big news," and any reporter who relayed that information would have to feel kind of burned. And surely it can't be some presidential announcement—doing so this far out would be too goofy even for Schweitzer.

So could he really be planning a Senate run, after all that? If so, then why did he reiterate this line to Banks on Wednesday?

"I am not goofy enough to be in the House, and I'm not senile enough to be in the Senate."
That exact quote is something Schweitzer's used before, and it's, uh, not exactly the kind of thing you repeat right before announcing a bid for Senate. Also, for what it's worth, Schweitzer told Banks that he wasn't responsible for the post to his Facebook page that linked to the PPP poll; rather, he says his staff did that, and that he hadn't even seen the poll himself. Seems like a weird lack of message coordination. Anyhow, maybe he is just announcing a new charity or the like. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

10:15 AM PT: MA-05: Heh. David Bernstein rounds up a few quotes from local pols who are pretending to be offended that some of their rivals have already made preparations to run for Congress if Ed Markey wins the upcoming Senate special election—and I say "pretending" because these same chutzpadik hacks admit they are eyeing the race themselves! That includes state Rep. Kathi-Anne Reinstein and Cambridge City Councilor Leland Cheung, both of whom think they can score points by feigning patience of their own and offense toward the haste of others. Whatever! This is politics, and being last out the gate is seldom a recipe for victory.

Anyway, interest in this seat is extremely hot among Democrats, particularly since this is a solidly blue seat that Ed Markey's held since before I was born. In addition to the three candidates who have already opened campaign accounts—state Rep. Carl Sciortino and state Sens. William Brownsberger and Katherine Clark—and the two whiners noted above, Bernstein digs deep on the Great Mentioner front to provide this comprehensive list:

State Senator Karen Spilka of Ashland tells me "I am seriously interested."

Others said to be interested include Wayland State Representative Tom Conroy, Cambridge State Representative Sean Garballey, Registrar of Motor Vehicles Rachel Kaprielian, Middlesex Sheriff Peter Koutoujian, Middlesex District Attorney Gerald Leone, Medford Mayor Michael McGlynn, and Revere Mayor Dan Rizzo.

Oh, and perhaps State Attorney General Martha Coakley, who lives in Medford, or former state senator Warren Tolman of Watertown — or any of the district's who's-who of current and former pols, administration officials, and business leaders.

Well, comprehensive except for the fact that, as Bernstein acknowledges, pretty much everyone who's anyone (and even some folks who aren't) could potentially run here. All signs point to an awesome multi-way primary.

10:33 AM PT: NJ-Sen: I really wish Quinnipiac had asked about a hypothetical Democratic Senate primary now that Frank Lautenberg is retiring. Instead, all we've got is a matchup between Cory Booker and... Geraldo Rivera. That's good enough for some lulz, at least, even before seeing the numbers, just because Rivera is such a joke of a clown of a goofball—dude always makes me laugh. Anyway, the numbers are funny, too, since Booker pastes him 59-23. There was nothing in Al Capone's vault, and nothing in Geraldo's political future, either.

11:28 AM PT: Fundraising: We're bringing back our monthly roundup of fundraising reports from the big six party committees, which file with the FEC on the 20th of each month. Here's January:

Committee Jan. Receipts Jan. Spent Cash-on-Hand CoH Change Debt
DCCC $6,080,512 $3,007,002 $4,561,731 $3,073,510 $12,556,407
NRCC $4,447,693 $3,190,681 $2,791,623 $1,257,012 $11,000,000
DSCC $4,200,000 $3,000,000 $1,190,041
NRSC
DNC $4,371,825 $3,994,747 $4,669,216 $377,078 $20,776,025
RNC $6,899,146 $4,586,341 $7,074,817 $2,312,805 $0
Total Dem $14,652,337 $7,001,749 $12,230,948 $4,640,629 $33,332,432
Total GOP $11,346,839 $7,777,023 $9,866,440 $3,569,817 $11,000,000

Why all the gaps? As you may know, the Senate is still stuck in the 19th Century and refuses to require that fundraising reports—whether for individual senators or party committees like the DSCC and NRSC—be filed electronically. Instead, they're delivered on paper to the FEC, which must then scan them before posting them online, which typically takes a couple of weeks. It's insane, and it's absolutely antithetical to any notions of democratic transparency, which means it's just another reason why the Senate is the worst institution in America.

Because of this, unless we want to wait, we have to rely on data voluntarily released by the two committees, and as you can see, it's often incomplete. The DSCC had a pretty good month and so they've graced us with a few tidbits they share with Beltway publications like Roll Call and Politico. The NRSC, though... crickets, but DSCC press secretary Justin Barasky says his rivals have raised "about one third" of what Democrats did in January. No wonder why they're clamming up. (Oh yeah, there is one way to see fundraising totals for both of these committees in something like a timely fashion: If you're near the Capitol, you can visit the Senate Clerk's office and take a glance at the cover page of the monthly reports. Really convenient.)

So I'm sorry to bring you an incomplete report (despite my best efforts to goad the NRSC on Twitter), but you'll have to blame the Senate. What else is new?

1:22 PM PT: IL-02: Debbie Halvorson has certainly run one of the weirdest campaigns we've seen in a while, alternately sticking to her guns on, well, guns, while complaining she's being attacked on guns, and also trying to put some daylight between herself and the NRA on, yeah, guns. So of course, in the midst of this muddle, she took time out from campaigning to... apply for a license to carry a concealed firearm. Even weirder, Halvorson doesn't even own a gun! I just don't know what to say about all that.

But this, on the other hand, is pretty simple:

Still, the Illinois State Rifle Association started fighting back on her behalf on Wednesday, sending out a direct mailer to thousands of its members living in the district asking them to vote for Ms. Halvorson, according to Richard A. Pearson, the association's executive director.

"We can't let that go unanswered," he said of the advertising campaign against her. His group had planned to endorse Ms. Halvorson in a news release on Thursday, but decided not to at the last minute, Mr. Pearson said, though he would not explain why.

I can explain why, not that you needed me to: Even the NRA (ISRA is their local affiliate) knows that their endorsement would be more damaging than helpful to Halvorson. That's really a first, since the NRA is typically accustomed to their endorsements being coveted. Yet now, they are forced to hold their fire (har har).

While we're on the subject, I also enjoyed Abby Livingston's new piece in Roll Call, in which she offered a couple of choice tidbits. Here is Halvorson, insisting she is somehow the front-runner in the race:

"People are with me. Our phones ring off the hook. There are Facebook posts."
There are Facebook posts! Indeed, there are. As Jair Herbstman wryly opined, Facebook posts must be the new yard signs—hence victory is inevitable for Halvorson. More importantly, Livingston had another good score as well, reporting that "Kelly boasted a double-digit lead over the field in Hutchinson’s internal polling—an automated survey taken before she exited the race, according to a source familiar with it." Here's hoping that's accurate, and that it holds through election day.

1:29 PM PT: MA-Sen: Hardly a shocker: Two-time losing congressional candidate Sean Bielat says he won't try collecting signatures to get on the ballot for the Massachusetts Senate special election. Remarkably, he sent out an email appeal over the weekend begging supporters to raise an eye-popping $150,000 in just a few days, something that presumably didn't pan out. Anyhow, that leaves three Republicans—state Rep. Dan Winslow, businessman Gabriel Gomez, and former U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan—all trying to gather 10,000 signatures apiece by the Feb. 27 deadline. We'll soon see if anyone's successful.

1:59 PM PT: SC-01: It's been a bit tricky to get a handle on the Republican primary for the SC-01 special election, mostly because the field is so damn crowded, there's been no polling, and trail guide Mark Sanford has been sucking up most of the oxygen. It also means there will almost definitely be a runoff, though figuring out who might earn the top two slots is no easy task. But here's one name to keep an eye on: state Sen. Larry Grooms, who just secured endorsements from two members of South Carolina's congressional delegation, Mick Mulvaney and Jeff Duncan.

It's not that either of these guys have much juice in a district they don't represent, but rather the fact that Grooms has the connections and wherewithal to lock down high-level establishment support like that. Perhaps it won't mean much in the end, but it certainly separates Grooms from the Some Dudes.

2:27 PM PT: Maps: Here's another fun one from the bizarro maps department: Geography Prof. Andrew Shears put together his vision of the "124 United States That Could've Been," based on the notion that countless state secession movements contemplated over the years had all succeeded. Some you may have heard of if this kind of alternate history appeals to you, like Absaroka or Jefferson. Others, I'm guessing, are going to be way more obscure—Red Wisconsin, anyone? Here's a glimpse of Shears' map, but you'll want to click through for the full-size version:

Alternate history U.S. map of 124 states
It looks to me like I'd still live in the state of New York (plus ça change), but how about you? Where would you wind up if your forebears had succeeded in creating a new state?

2:32 PM PT (David Jarman): Ideology: The full numbers for everyone in Congress for National Journal's annual vote ratings are out, after several days of teases. They have plenty of articles today trying to milk the release every way possible, but this is the most interesting: it features a chart that looks at the average score for members in each of a variety of demographic categories. It's sorted by gender, by region, by race, by religion, and by length of tenure. (Amusing footnote: the most conservative categories among House Republican members are "Jewish" and "African-American," even more so than "South." Of course, that's because those samples consist entirely of Eric Cantor, Allen West, and Tim Scott.)

2:33 PM PT: Montana: I haven't paid much attention to the hypothetical 2016 presidential matchups PPP's been doing, mostly because if Hillary Clinton actually runs, her sky-high favorability ratings will inevitably fall back to earth once people start remembering that yes, she's a full-blown Democrat. But the firm's Montana miscellany stands out to me because Clinton actually trails Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan by several points there, even though she's led them in a string of very red states that includes Alaska, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Texas. Either that means PPP wound up with an unusually red sample (we can only pray), or Montana really is looking rough for Democrats (which I fear is more likely).

There is one bit of good news, though: Newly-elected Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock starts off with a 43-18 job approval rating, which is not too shabby.

2:47 PM PT: GA-Sen: There's been some tiresome back-and-forth all day about whether GOP Rep. Phil Gingrey actually plans to run for Senate, with Gingrey's camp kinda-sorta denying it, but now The Hill is citing various sources who say that Gingrey does indeed plan to run. One consultant, Tom Perdue, even said that Gingrey announced his intentions on a conference call with a dozen people. That's some incredibly sloppy roll-out and I wouldn't be surprised if it winds up being indicative of the kind of campaign Gingrey ends up running.

3:03 PM PT: Finally, full numbers from the DSCC and NRSC. No wonder Republicans tried to hide their fundraising: They took in just $1.5 million last month!

3:05 PM PT: LA-Sen: Here's a new name to add to the pile of possible GOP Senate contenders: state board of education chief Chas Roemer, who is the son of former Gov. Buddy Roemer. I don't know if pops has much goodwill left, seeing as he ran a no-hope race for president last year, seeking the nominations of the Republican Party, the Reform Party, and Americans Elect! That's quite the trifecta, but to top it off, he wound up endorsing libertarian weirdo Gary Johnson in the end—not exactly a team player. Buddy's been irrelevant for a while, though, and Chas may well have carved out his own profile, so he could be a player despite his father going off the political deep end.

3:28 PM PT: FL-Gov: The reinvention of Gov. Rick Scott continues, now with his about-face on accepting billions in federal Medicaid funds as part of the Affordable Care Act. But this move is rife with pitfalls. For one, Scott is insisting on privatizing Medicaid statewide, and the federal government granted him a waiver to do so—though it may only be so much rope: The Miami Herald described the privatization as an expansion of "a five-county pilot program that has been rife with problems."

What's more, are the sorts of people who would benefit most from the expansion of Medicaid really going to want to now pull the lever for a Republican like Scott? That sounds implausible at best. And at the same time Scott is courting low-income Democrats who probably already loathe him, he's pissing off his base, with tea partiers calling him a "Benedict Arnold" and ambitious state Agriculture Secretary Adam Putnam tweeting that the expansion "does not create jobs or strengthen our infrastructure. And it will cost Florida $5B over the next 10 years." Could that presage a primary challenge? We can only hope.

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

  •  Wow... (6+ / 0-)

    A list of empty diary jokes that David Nir appreciates!

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

    by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:20:53 AM PST

  •  MN-6, MN-Sen? (11+ / 0-)

    Bachmann seems to have been awe fully quiet since her scare in November. My guess is that a consultant finally got to her ear and told her to tone it down a little bit. But there is a tiny chance that she is keeping her head down to take on Franken next year.

    http://www.minnpost.com/...

  •  MN-8, MN-Gov '18 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Woody, WisJohn, ArkDem14, MichaelNY

    Mark Dayton's favorite Iron Ranger, Tony Sertich, now has a second high-level gig, in addition to being the IRRB chairman, he now sits on the Duluth Port Authority. Prior to taking over at the IRRB he was the state House majority leader, and speaker-presumptive before 2010 cost Democrats the majority for a term. Rick Nolan will be 75 when Congress convenes in 2019, and Sertich would be a logical successor to Nolan. That being said, Sertich may have his eyes on replacing Dayton, but he would face long odds in what certainly will be a crowded 2018 DFL field.

    http://www.minnpost.com/...

  •  Kentucky House closing in on redistricting (7+ / 0-)

    http://mycn2.com/...

    Looks like Rep. Jill York (R-Grayson) and Toby Herald (R-Beattyville) will be the odd members out in Eastern KY. I am also pretty sure that Rep. Ben Waide (R-Madisonville) will see his seat carved up. These seats likely to be moved to the Louisville and Lexington areas. I also expect Rep. Brian Linder (R-Dry Ridge) may get a safer seat by giving him the southern leftovers of Kenton, Campbell and Boone counties.

    "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 Feb 21, 2013 at 07:35:25 AM PST

    •  Looks good so far. (0+ / 0-)

      "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

      by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:42:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's all just kabuki, though, isn't it? (0+ / 0-)

        GOP-held Senate still has to agree to something.

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

        by David Nir on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:46:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Most likely (5+ / 0-)

          It will be similar to New York's "arrangement", where each body gets to gerrymander itself.

          25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

          by HoosierD42 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:58:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Each house agrees to the other's gerrymander (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lordpet8, MichaelNY

          that's enforced by having a Democratic governor so it won't be like Virginia where Democrats are forced to scale back their gerrymander.

          "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

          by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:24:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not so certain (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen, MichaelNY

            There was a LOT of fighting last time. Then again, the congressional map was also a piece of the puzzle, and at least some GOPers thought they got burned on Chandler's district. So much for that....

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

            by David Nir on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:35:00 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The only uncertainty was with the courts (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              pistolSO

              both houses passed the other's gerrymander with only those being drawn out or badly hurt by it moaning over it.  Also, Cong. redistricting was done a little later as it was hard to reach agreement and it was where the whining was concentrated on the Republican side.  At least it was a small net plus for Dems and they can pick back up the 6th with a better adapted candidate.

              "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

              by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:42:11 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  I wish they would have creeped the 6th district (0+ / 0-)

              farther back into Eastern Kentucky.  Although it would be a bit oddly shaped, Obama would have been in the upper 40%s in 2008 without any county splits.  That would have dropped quite a bit in 2012, and Ben Chandler probably still would have lost due to his Cap-and-Trade.  But it would be a very tough hold for conservative Rep. Andy Barr.

  •  Anyone see the lulzy NJ-Sen numbers (6+ / 0-)

    With Geraldo Rivera up against Cory Booker?

    59-23.  That's pretty funny.

    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/...

    Swingnut since 2009, 22, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

    by Daman09 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:44:46 AM PST

  •  Shelby to switch from no to yes on Hagel (11+ / 0-)

    "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

    by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:04:06 AM PST

  •  Reid says he will seek re-election in 2016 (9+ / 0-)

    www.buonoforgovernor.com

    by Paleo on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:36:55 AM PST

    •  Of course he'd say that this far out (8+ / 0-)

      he has absolutely no incentive to announce his retirement.

      I think it's more likely than not that he does retire in 2016 and I rather hope he does, not because I hate him as majority leader by any means, but because A) If we capture the Lt. Gov's office this cycle I can't imagine Sandoval running in 2016 and B) It would be easier for Cortez Masto or someone to hold the seat in a presidential year.

    •  That's a bit of a mischaracterization (9+ / 0-)

      "Sure why not" as an impulsive answer to the reporter's question is not something anyone should take seriously as a reelection decision.

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

      by DCCyclone on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:18:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  But it's highly unlikely (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, lordpet8

      he'll be made Majority Leader for yet another cycle after 2016, if he keeps the position after 2014. He's been the Democratic floor leader now for going on a decade., and could conceivably keep it for 12 years. But that would tie him as the 3rd longest serving floor leader ever, behind only Mike Mansfield and Joseph Taylor Robinson.

      "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

      by ArkDem14 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:22:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That would be unusual (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Isn't it rare for a Majority Leader to leave the leadership while still remaining a Senator? I guess Robert Byrd did it, though that was mainly because he had more power running Appropriations (that a lot of Democrats were tired of how he did business was a distant second from what I've read).

        Maybe if Reid has lots of grudges going with members that would make sense, but he seems like he gets along with everyone well. He doesn't push, as we saw in January. Maybe the young turks like Udall and Merkley would try to take him on, but that's all I've got.

        •  It depends (0+ / 0-)

          Byrd was gearing up to be Pro-Temp, which I believe had about the same pay as majority leader but less work required (plus you get a nice amount of staff)

          But yes it's not all that common for a sitting senate majority leave his post but remain a senator (barring some scandal like Lott).

          In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

          by lordpet8 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:40:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

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

            But that's short for Pro Tempore, so there's nothing really wrong with your abbreviation; I just haven't seen it before.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:04:06 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I used to be Pro Tempore of a student government (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              senate and for some reason we always used that abbreviation.

              In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

              by lordpet8 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:15:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  I'm just saying (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LordMike, MichaelNY

          Reid has already established himself, just by serving up to 2015, as one of the longest serving Party floor leaders in the history of the Senate. Chuck Schumer is a well-connected, eloquent, high-powered politician who wants the position, and he's insanely popular in a very Democratic state (which means Democrats wouldn't have to worry anymore about any of the "target the majority leader" junk that's happened the last two cycles where their floor leader was up for reelection). Schumer would also, I think, be better at putting the pressure on Republicans and playing the aggressive sum game that McConnell and other leaders of the Senate have turned Congressional politics into.

          I just personally think that Reid could serve until 2016 as Majority leader. Then he'd be 77. Schumer would be 66. At that point I would be ready for a Schumer-Klobuchar Majority Leader-Majority Whip configuration.

          "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

          by ArkDem14 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:43:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  doesn't surprise me (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, MichaelNY

      Ever since we did better than expected for the 2012 senate races he's felt like he's got some mojo going for him. He'll probably end up as the second longest serving senate majority leader.(assuming we hold onto our majority in 2014 and make decent gains in 2016)

      In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

      by lordpet8 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:55:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ashley Judd for Congress, no seriously! (4+ / 0-)

    You can read my newest diary expressing my support for a Judd Congressional run... against Blue Dog "I hate voting with Republicans but still do it" Jim Cooper in the district where she basically lives.

    (Sorry for having multiple diaries on the sidebar. I tried removing the DK Elections tag on the older ones but it wouldn't do it.)

    •  Tag adding/removal (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf, pistolSO

      Doesn't take effect immediately.

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

      by David Nir on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:51:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Makes a hell of a lot of sense to me (4+ / 0-)

      I'm generally not wild about political novices running for the Senate as a rule. It's what, four times the workload as the House, since they do the same work with 1/4 the personnel (yeah I know they have more staff, but still). It's much higher visibility and requires much more sophisticated campaigns. Much more politically challenging. The House is where you start. And if she wanted to eventually go for the Senate, probably better to run in a state where the Democrats have little bench (like TN), than in a state like KY where that is considerable.

      I doubt she'd do it now, since being rumored so long in the context of Kentucky politics would make a Tennessee run look bad. But what you suggest is better any way you look at it.

  •  Karl Rove (8+ / 0-)

    For more than a decade, Republicans have looked to Karl Rove for the solution. Now, a growing number see him as the problem.

    It's amazing how strongly the conservatives are pushing back against Rove's fairly sensible idea to push electable candidates in primaries.  No one can seriously deny at this point that terrible Senate nominees have cost Republicans at least 4 senate seats.  It is a very real problem that has plagued them in two back-to-back elections, and shows no signs of abating, with the possible candidacies of Steve King in Iowa, and Joe Miller in Alaska.

    Yet rather than recognize this problem, conservatives are instead shooting the messenger.

    •  I think there's a good case to be made that (8+ / 0-)

      teabagger challenges cost Republicans control of the senate.

      Colorado 2010: Absolutely
      Delaware 2010: Absolutely
      Nevada 2010: Most likely
      Indiana 2012: Without a doubt the surest of the bunch
      Missouri 2012: Probably

      That's five directly, but then you have to factor all the spending the NRSC had to put into races like Kentucky, Florida, Pennsylvania, Alaska (?) in 2010 that could have tipped the balance in Washington 2010, or Montana or North Dakota 2012 and I think there's a solid chance that teabagger primary challenges cost Republicans 6 seats.

      •  MO-Sen was a definite loss (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pistolSO, WisJohn, LordMike, MichaelNY

        McCaskill was in jeopardy until Akin spoke about rape.

        "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

        by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:28:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think once he was her opponent she won (9+ / 0-)

          but the legitimate rape comment sealed the deal. Remember he had said some pretty batshit crazy stuff before that like calling Medicare and Social Security unconstitutional. It would have been more like Indiana's margin with the third party candidates maybe playing spoiler.

          •  I think the tea party cost not to the Republicans (0+ / 0-)

            as high number of seats.

            Just this argument is valid also for Nevada. Even I think that the stablishment candidate was fairly weak in 2010, and I think H Reid would have win even vs the stablishment candidate. But still H Reid, like C McCaskill, has the opponent he won.

            And also I think the case of Colorado was not about a victory of the tea party over the stablisment candidate, this was more a case of the frontrunner imploding. I think it was not a "merit" of the tea party.

            I see only two clear cases: Indiana and Delaware, and even I'm not 100% sure about Delaware.

            •  mmm I was mixing CO-Gov and CO-Sen (0+ / 0-)

              Well, also in Colorado, J Norton was not as strong as the stablishment candidate, and I have doubts about if she would have won. Not clear for me.

              •  Jane Norton (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JBraden, MichaelNY

                WAS the establishment candidate. ... ...

                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 Feb 21, 2013 at 11:18:40 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

                  She was not as strong candidate, and I think she would not win the race in Colorado, even winning the primary.

                  But in the previous message I was thinking about S McInnis, who also was a stablishment candidate, but for CO-Gov, and imploded.

                  •  You said (0+ / 0-)

                    That Jane Norton was not as strong as the establishment candidate, but she was the establishment candidate so how can she not be as strong as herself???

                    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 Feb 21, 2013 at 11:34:31 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  no (0+ / 0-)

                      I said in the first message that the case of Colorado was not a Democratic victory thanks to the tea party. I said that was more a case of the stablishment candidate imploding (refered to S McInnis).

                      In the second message I said that I was mixing CO-Gov and CO-Sen. And also I try to tell that J Norton, the stablishment candidate for CO-Sen 2010, was not as strong, and that she would not be able to win the race, even winning the primary.

                      This is my point.

                      I think only the victories in IN-Sen 2012 and DE-Sen 2010 are thanks to the tea-party.

                      •  And I quote you directly: (0+ / 0-)
                        J Norton was not as strong as the stablishment candidate
                        http://www.dailykos.com/...

                        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 Feb 21, 2013 at 01:49:15 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  you can find surely many mistakes in my english (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Skaje

                          I was talking about her as the stablishment candidate. I know not exactly if this is a miskate or not, sorry if the mistakes make I explain not well my point.

                          If you need I repeat or explain more something, ask me with confidance because I know that my english is poor still.

                          •  Your English (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            abgin, MichaelNY, skibum59

                            Honestly is perfectly understandable almost all the time. After re-reading multiple times and consulting a friend, you probably meant something more like this:

                            "Jane Norton, as the establishment candidate, was not as strong."

                            Yes? Sorry for not understanding.

                            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 Feb 21, 2013 at 02:18:34 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  speaking as a person with a lot of experience (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            MichaelNY

                            listening to non-native speakers (former TESOL instructor), I think our colleague abgin does an AMAZING job writing in English when his mother tongue is unrelated.

                            A Republican is a person who says we need to rebuild Iraq but not New Orleans. - Temple Stark

                            by Christopher Walker on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:11:43 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

        •  I think "probable" is correct (7+ / 0-)

          Brunner or Steelman could have still lost to McCaskill due to gaffes and/or skeletons that would have come out if those campaigns had actually taken place. Likewise Bennet against Norton or Reid against Lowden or Baby Tark.

          Lugar and Castle weren't going to lose, though. Those are definite.

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

          by sacman701 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:38:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Don't think Nevada was on the table in 2010 (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lordpet8, JBraden, LordMike, pademocrat

        Sure, Reid's numbers were terrible, but the three major contenders for the nomination to run against him were all problems. Sue Lowden's campaign imploded before the primary, so she wasn't really teabagged so much as dismissed for not having a clue about how healthcare policy worked. And Danny Tarkanian...probably would have been an easier task beating him than Angle. At least, that's what four other people found.

        •  I never understood why (3+ / 0-)

          Sue Lowden was considered some fearsome juggernaut.  She was a one-term state senator (lost re-election to a Democrat in 1996) and unremarkable chairwoman of the Nevada GOP from 2007-2009.  And she completely self-immolated in the primary.  And she has ethics troubles!

          Sure, she's not as much of a batshit lunatic as Sharrrrrrrrron Angle, but I still find it hard to believe that she would have beaten the majority leader of the United States Senate.

      •  I don't know about Colorado. (3+ / 0-)

        Sure, Bennet a narrow victory, but the Buck/Norton gap isn't nearly as clear to me as the O'Donnell/Castle gap (really, the O'Donnell/Anyone gap plus the Anyone/Castle gap).

        27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14). Also at [http://xenocrypt.blogspot.com Xenocrypt's Site].

        by Xenocrypt on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:45:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  In the case of Colorado.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        ...I think we're forgetting Jane Norton was making some gaffes of her own.  I can see her blowing that race just as easily.   And  Sue Lowden with her "chicken" comments might have also been as tarred as Angle and without the base enthusiasm to somewhat compensate.

        Yes the more conservative candidates won in those races.  But it was not just because they were conservatives.  But because the moderates who really were not all that terribly moderate were running awful campaigns.

        The lady was enchanted and said they ought to see. So they charged her with subversion and made her watch TV -Spirogyra

        by Taget on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:43:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Additional GOP effort could not have helped (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stephen Wolf

        Rossi in Washington. He didn't lack for funds or volunteers. He just couldn't sway enough voters. 47% was basically his ceiling. If Murray had had more resources she might have pushed her total above 53%.

        Washington is a high turnout state but the areas where turnout dropped slightly were deeply Democratic. Turnout is some Republican areas exceeded previous record highs. Rossi didn't leave any votes "on the table" but Murray did.

    •  i find it fascinating how rudderless the GOP is (13+ / 0-)

      right now. Rove simply wants to select candidates who, while being conservative, are not un-electable nut jobs who don't know how to keep their mouths shut of issues such as rape. In other words, he just wants a cosmetic change, not a real change in policy. Yet the GOP is so resistant even what appears to be a cosmetic change. The reason, imo, is that, to the party base, there really is no distinction between cosmetics and policy. To the tea party, being a good Republican simply is being a loud-mouth, anti-science asshole whose simply goal is to stick it to Obama for its own sake. As that recent poll showed, Republicans base their policy positions less on any preconceived principles and more on whether Obama supports it or not.

      The GOP is very weak right now. There are no credible leaders or institutions that can turn things around. The only thing that is capable of working is the shock of electoral defeat. And right now, being in control of the House is hurting them more than helping them. It's going to take more electoral defeats, either losing the House or losing another presidential election, in order to turn the ship.

      •  This is 100 percent correct. (5+ / 0-)

        Another way to look at it is to focus on Iowa. I'm guessing policy wise Steve King and Tom Latham are very much alike.  But because Steve King is willing to be a "birther" and call immigrants dogs, the senile old white guys who turn out for the Republican primaries favor him by a double digit margin over Latham, despite the latter being more electable.

      •  In theory (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BennyToothpick, MichaelNY

        John Boehner should be the defacto leader of the party as he is speaker (just as Tip O'Neill was in the 1980s). But even he has trouble controlling his caucus so there is quite a bit of disconnect. Even when Boehner can get his house Republicans to do something the Senate R's often ended up doing something quite the opposite or vice versa.

        The only thing that seems to unite them is wanting to be against everything the president is for. While this keeps them somewhat together it leaves the party not really standing for anything.

        In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

        by lordpet8 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:22:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Tip/Boehner (3+ / 0-)

          Interesting parallel. I actually think Boehner would love to be the Tip O'Neill to Obama's Reagan, at least in some areas. Boehner, unlike Cantor, actually gives off the appearance of being a legislator. Unfortunately, it's simply not possible for him to fill that role. Boehner's not as strong a public-facing pol, doesn't have his caucus under control, isn't a trusted (or trustworthy) negotiator. He also has to constantly exude belligerence and spite for Obama personally so that the 'baggers feel he's one of them.

    •  Well it's the fact that many can't fathom (3+ / 0-)

      the thought that a candidate can be too conservative to win. Rove is actually making it worse by creating that PAC. The best way to keep the likes of King and Miller running is to tell them I'm going to oppose you and spend money against you because you're unlectable. That just goads them into actually wanting to run and prove to Rove that they can still win the primary.

      And at the same time you have the so called establishment candidates fearing that if Rove endorses them it will be a kiss of death to the primary voters and doom their candidacy from the start.

      In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

      by lordpet8 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:04:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  does Latham really believe the same (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        shit as this shit?  Because that is some really messed up shit that a normal human should not believe.

        ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 11:11:37 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, no I'm sure he doesn't.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skibum59, MichaelNY

          But my point is that on substantive issues Latham and King vote the same. My point of agreement with Benny Toothpick is that because King is willing to seem batsh*t crazy and attack the President on very personal terms, he gets the majority of Republican primary voters who only think about style and don't care a whit about substance.

          That's one of the reasons why the Republicans are in so much trouble right now.

          (as a point of fact, I can't imagine even people like Akin and Mourdock agree with King on dogfighting. He's out on a limb on that one).

      •  sorry, that was supposed to be a reply to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lordpet8

        markhanna.

        ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 11:12:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  it's ironic that while GOP believes that 47% (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, skibum59

        of the American people are so dependent on the government that they would never vote for a conservative, they also believe that a candidate can never be too conservative to win. You'd think that being cognizant of conservatism's unpopularity among a very large percentage of the American people would lead them to nominate less conservative candidates areas where a lot of 47%-ers live.

    •  I'm amazed that Rove has managed to (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, itskevin, MichaelNY

      remain credible post-Bush admin.

      I mean, ultimately, he was the architect of policies that led to a GOP president becoming extremely unpopular. Why GOP wants to embrace him after 2008, I dont really know why.

    •  I really wished Cortez-Mastos had ran (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf

      last year instead of Berkley. Im convinced she would had won that race.

      NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

      by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:08:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Perhaps (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stephen Wolf, James Allen, MichaelNY

        However, as far as I know, if she'd won her election to the Senate, Sandoval would've gotten to replace her with a Republican Attorney General. Having her in the Senate would still be preferable, but that's still something to keep in mind.

        The Pragmatic Progressive (IN-4); Economic Left/Right: -7.12; Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.44

        by AndySonSon on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:55:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  WI-Gov: Internal revolt within WI GOP over budget? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WisJohn, LordMike

    Republican Wisconsin State Senator Luther Olsen has signaled that some Republicans in the Wisconsin State Legislature have serious concerns about the expansion of public-school vouchers that is included in Scott Walker's proposed biennial budget. Democrats would need 11 Republican defections in the Assembly, 2 Republican defections in the Senate, or both, to stop the budget.

    Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

    by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:13:23 AM PST

    •  that's policy, not electoral, isn't it? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OGGoldy, LordMike, MichaelNY, skibum59

      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. -.4.12, -4.92

      by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:40:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  yes, but (0+ / 0-)

        any potential factional cracks in a GOP majority state legislative chamber, over an issue important to GOP voters, has potential implications for future primary battles, so I like to keep an eye on them.    Kansas & Montana politics have featured recent GOP civil wars of great interest, to cite two.

        I'm also trying to keep an eye on the increasing intrusion of the education-for-pay lobby into electoral politics, so that item was a two-fer, in its way.

        A Republican is a person who says we need to rebuild Iraq but not New Orleans. - Temple Stark

        by Christopher Walker on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:20:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  MA-05: Hopefully (5+ / 0-)

    If Victory Fun gets involved in the primary, we can get Sciortino through.

    Sciortino is 34 (he'll turn 35 before the special election). At least three of the others mentioned are in their 50s, the only one younger is Garballey (27). Not only is Sciortino gay, but he's also young enough to accrue seniority in the House. So I would be all behind him.

    25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

    by HoosierD42 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:27:28 AM PST

  •  Really off-topic (10+ / 0-)

    But a cracked.com article today talks about how politicians don't understand poverty, and a couple of the statements quoted in there were actually submitted by myself when the author asked political nerds for help before writing the article.  Specifically, the references to former SC Lt. Gov. Bauer and NE AG Bruning comparing welfare to feeding stray animals.  Excuse the really off-topic nature of this, I just thought it was cool that I got to use my mental encyclopedia of "offensive shit politicians say" to help with a front-page article on Cracked.

  •  MA-05: Martha Coakley? Yuck! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stephen Wolf, LordMike, MichaelNY

    Just the thought of her running for Congress if Markey becomes Senator makes me feel ill.   I am sure that Democratic primary voters will need to made aware of her conservative actions and the whole Fells Acre thing too.   Coakley in Markey's seat is a definite downgrade.

    Conroy is my state Rep so I'll be watching the MA-05 primary with a lot of interest.

    I agree with President Obama, our country's journey is not yet complete. We must continue the work that our forebearers at Seneca Falls started, and put the Equal Rights Amendment into our Constitution.

    by pistolSO on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:42:00 AM PST

    •  IMO, it doesn't really make sense (5+ / 0-)

      to think that Martha Coakley would run for the House, unless she's indicated clear interest in doing so.

      Having passed up chances to again try to be a Senator in the majority, and then to govern Massachusetts, why would she want to be a junior minority member of a 435-member body?

      37, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

      by Mike in MD on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:31:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Why ppl here have such vicous hate for the her (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dc1000, HoosierD42

      I mean get over it, people her take personal against her. We got the seat now, so what now?

      NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

      by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:42:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, why such hate? (5+ / 0-)

        All she did was lose an unloseable race, in the process ending the period where Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority and were rapidly enacting reforms. She also wound up taking the HCR process another two months to complete when it was all but done, and allowed one of the most irritating politicians in the land to preen for three years.

        We did get the seat back eventually, but we'll not have the huge House majority or 60 Senate seats for some time to come.

        •  true (5+ / 0-)

          but when ppl talk about her with such personal hate, its a turn off, even though her lost did those things, but we would had lost seats regardless that yr.

          When it becomes to Republicans then yea, I say it's perfectly fine to make it personal, and hate them personally with viciousness.

          NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

          by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:57:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

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

            I have nothing against her personally, but what she cost us...just wow. Democrats never recovered from her screw-up psychologically. The willingness to act boldly ended with Brown's election, and after that everyone was so damn nervous that they didn't take the kids of actions that could have led to a less disastrous outcome.

  •  Huntsman evolves on gay marriage (13+ / 0-)

    He argues conservative states should join liberal states in legalizing gay marriage and seems to suggest it should happen even if voters themselves aren't quite there yet. Story here.

    Marriage is not an issue that people rationalize through the abstract lens of the law; rather it is something understood emotionally through one’s own experience with family, neighbors, and friends. The party of Lincoln should stand with our best tradition of equality and support full civil marriage for all Americans.

    This is both the right thing to do and will better allow us to confront the real choice our country is facing: a choice between the Founders’ vision of a limited government that empowers free markets, with a level playing field giving opportunity to all, and a world of crony capitalism and rent-seeking by the most powerful economic interests.

    I think he's going to run again in 2016. What I'm wondering is whether he does it as a Republican and bows out early, or whether he does it as an independent.

    Would an indie bid by Huntsman -- who is very wealthy, mind, and has been building up name rec since 2008 or so -- be likelier to hurt the Democratic nominee (let's call her "Hilsten O'Cuoweitzlooper") or the Republican nominee ("Ranco Chryandal")?

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

    by SaoMagnifico on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:02:21 AM PST

    •  I think Huntsman (13+ / 0-)

      will be even more of a non-factor in 2016 than he was in 2012.  The 2012 crowd was basically Romney, Huntsman, and a bunch of clowns.  2016 will surely see multiple serious candidates.  Huntsman will get completely ignored if he tries to run again, and if he goes indie he will get ignored even more than Gary Johnson was.  With his support of same-sex marriage (commendable as it is), he has effectively ended his political career, although it could be argued it's already pretty over.  Democrats won't trust him, Republicans will hate him.

    •  Huntsman will get less than .5% at best (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gygaxian, LordMike

      He has no base of support and most people will be like "John who?" I can't imagine he'd piss away his fortune knowing that.

      Also he would definitely hurt Republicans more if at all given how far to the right he is on economics. The Huntsman appeal to Dems and indies is similar to that of Ron Paul, people have no idea what their stances are on economics and only know of them because they have unorthodox views on social issues for a Republican (or at least pretend to).

    •  I think he wishes he never ran in 2012... (6+ / 0-)

      He would have never had to lower himself to the 2012 GOP primary field - he didn't establish any name cache for 2016 with his run.  I think there is a real chance that he could have been Pres Obama's second term Secretary of State, being pulled out of the China Ambassador gig for it.  

      As it is now, I think his Presidential chances are all but zero.  He doesn't add anything as a running mate either.  So the most he could hope for is a cabinet gig under a Republican President.  I could see him as Christie's Sec of State.  

      Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:16:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Or maybe head back to Utah... (10+ / 0-)

        To take on Sen. Lee in 2016 - Lee is a fringe nutter afterall.  He could run as an indie with Dem backing.  He could caucus with GOP for all I care.  He would be worlds better than Lee, and vote probably like Murkowski.  

        Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

        by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:19:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thats actually a really interesting idea (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WisJohn, LordMike, MichaelNY

          Clear the field of any and all Democrats, so that he could run as an Independent? He'd get all the Democratic support and peel of a number of Republicans.

          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 Feb 21, 2013 at 11:36:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'd vote for a Senator Huntsman. (3+ / 0-)

            He couldn't possibly be any worse than Mike Lee already is, and a Democrat won't win in Utah for another decade or so.

            In fact, I'd be a-okay with a draft movement to get him to do so.

            Though I will point out that he really only got elected in the first place because of money, Utah's adoration of his dad, a relaxed and well-meaning temperament, and charisma (compared to Olene Walker). Sure, he got re-elected by a massive margin, but that's because he got along well with the genial attitude of the Utah legislature at that time, and didn't screw anything up (besides having ultra-corrupt Gary Herbert as his running mate).

            Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

            by Gygaxian on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 12:39:54 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Huntsman could be formidable (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atdnext, JBraden, LordMike

      under the right circumstances. I actually think he's pretty engaging and likable, nerdy and actually has a sense of humor. Probably the one politician who's iPod playlists wouldn't be absolutely horrible, too.

      The thing is, though, that he doesn't really have great political instincts. I think John Weaver amplified the problem, I just think that guy is a horrible political operative. There was no way John McCain was going to win the GOP nomination in 2000 largely because of prepared speeches that Weaver should have vetoed--"agents of intolerance" was a brave and impressive speech, but utterly stupid for someone trying to convince the GOP base that he didn't despise them, and that was Weaver's job. And his work with Huntsman in 2012 was similarly high in media buzz but even worse in terms of building support. The logical path would have been to tout Huntsman's conservative record in a red state, but accentuate the positions on the environment, foreign policy restraint and social issue toleration that the general electorate would have liked. Instead, he let Huntsman piss off the base, then had him endorse the Ryan Plan. Schizophrenic. Weaver is the Bob Shrum of the right but worse. Just no clue how to play the game.

    •  I think he has the potential... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, tommypaine, MichaelNY, skibum59

      To make his 2016 bid as important and revolutionary as Michael Bloomberg's 2008 campaign. Remember that?

      [Hint: After all that media hype, Bloomberg never ran.]

      •  Except Bloomberg is important (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        and could have an impact with anything he does.

        Huntsman is entirely irrelevant in American politics.  People outside Utah don't give a political crap about this guy.

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 12:53:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

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

          Even Utahns don't really care. We like him, sure, but we don't really care all that much. The Salt Lake Tribune (The "Trib" as it is called) likes to keep an eye on what he's doing, but most of us couldn't care less. And we felt the same way during the 2012 election. Most Utahns were aware that Huntsman was running, but felt that Romney was the guy to support. In the eyes of Utahns, it would've been nice if Huntsman had been the Republican nominee, but it was clear that Romney was going to win.

          Of course, being a Jill Stein voter (though Democrat for the rest of the ballot) I laughed at everyone involved.

          Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

          by Gygaxian on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:23:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Huntsman's shot was in 2012.... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, Gygaxian, MichaelNY, MetroGnome

      ...trying to present himself as the more conservative establishment figure to Romney.  He actually had a shot in issue after issue if you compare him to Romney 2008 he was to the right of Romney.  And he had a good fundraising base and more important a loyal uber-wealthy superpac donor aka Dad.

      His mistake was he tried to concern troll conservatives while having all the correct positions.  Like say Lieberman.  He usually voted the correct way.  Just on the way there he'd go out of his way to spit in the face of his fellow Democrats.  Once Huntsman started using liberal talking points like the Republican Party being anti-science he was toast.

      In 2016 he has no shot running as Arlen Specter.  Now if the Republicans get wiped out in 2016 and have a Michael Dukakis moment it is possible they will have a Mike Dukakis moment and be opne to embracing a Bill Clinton.

      On the other hand the Democrats only got Bill Clinton because most of the major candidates passed, the liberal candidates flamed out, and Paul Tsongas surged out of nowhere and Clinton was able to position himself as the liberal candidate despite initially trying to position himself as the conservative candidate.

      Or in Republican terms if Huntsman found himself as the only alternative to Rand Paul and the social and wall street conservatives found themselves with no place else to go.

      The lady was enchanted and said they ought to see. So they charged her with subversion and made her watch TV -Spirogyra

      by Taget on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:55:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rec'd for those portmanteau names! (n/t) (0+ / 0-)

      29, chick, Jewish, solid progressive, NY-14 currently, FL-22 native, went to school in IL-01. "We need less of that War on Women, and more of that Warren woman!"-- writer Paul Myers.

      by The Caped Composer on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 11:39:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  SC-01: US Reps Duncan and Mulvaney (3+ / 0-)

    endorse State Senator Larry Grooms in SC-01.

    With 16 GOP candidates, it will be interesting to see if more elected officials(Tim Scott, Lindsey Graham, etc) rally around Grooms or someone else as an alternative to Sanford.

    link.

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

    Oh look who wants his old job back:

    ROME — One candidate promised to drop an unpopular new property tax and refund all prior payments in cash. Another called that proposal a “poisoned meatball,” disconnected from reality. A third suggested that Al Qaeda blow up the Italian Parliament — then backtracked — and the man generally considered the front-runner is campaigning on vague promises of stability, so has often been ignored.

    With only two weeks to go before national elections, the Italian campaign has become a surreal spectacle in which a candidate many had given up for dead, former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, has surged. Although he is not expected ever to govern again, with his media savvy and pie-in-the-sky offers of tax refunds, Mr. Berlusconi now trails the front-runner, Pierluigi Bersani, the leader of the Democratic Party, by about five or six points, according to a range of opinion polls published on Friday.

    http://www.nytimes.com/...

    Merkel is so afraid that Berlusconi could have his old job back she's had her government tell Italians in less than subtle ways not to vote for Berlusconi.

    Of course Berlusconi would love it if the Germans tried to meddle with the elections in Italy since most of his campaign has revolved around attacking austerity and Germany for forcing it on Italy. He recently accused Merkel of trying to force her Communist Eastern German upbringing upon the rest of Europe.

    The Republican party is now an extreme right-wing party that is owned by their billionaire campaign contributors. - Bernie Sanders

    by ehstronghold on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:30:35 AM PST

    •  Uh-oh, I might have a reason (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      to cheer on Berlusconi:

      most of his campaign has revolved around attacking austerity and Germany for forcing it on Italy.
      Which is terrible, because he's a disgusting sexist oligarch.

      Vaccinate your child. Vaccinate yourself. | Pro-transit, pro-gun, anti-NRA young black urban progressive | SSP/DKE | -9, -7.79 | MO-05 | Yard signs don't vote. | Hutchinson for IL-02!

      by gabjoh on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:23:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ew absolutely not (4+ / 0-)

        we should hope that the left wins here as they are slightly favored to.

        Germany's elections later this year will be absolutely crucial to determining the course of austerity in Europe.

        •  Perhaps (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LordMike, MichaelNY, gabjoh

          I was under the impression that the SDP largely favored continuing Merkel's policies. Surprising, I know, coming from one of the absolute worst center-left parties in the world.

          In any event, Merkel can't stay on the same course if she's completely isolated and she knows it. Losing Sarkozy and the former Netherlands PM (name eludes me) were huge blows. Looking very likely the UK puts Labour back in power in two years (or whenever Cameron and Clegg piss off each other enough to split), same with Spain. Italy going left would be another blow. Germany is the most powerful country in Europe, but it can't get its way if everyone else gangs up against them. Italy/UK/Spain will tell the tale.

          Also, seriously, Berlusconi again? Either that guy has some kind of hex on his country, or they really are too stupid to continue to be a first-world country. That would be like the U.S. re-electing George W. Bush.

          •  In Italy it really seems like the left coalition (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ArkDem14

            is the worst of the three evils with the other being Berlusconi and Monti.

            It would be interesting to see what happens at the EU level if all four of the UK, France, Germany, and Italy had the left in power. Sadly I don't expect a lot of progress with regards to the eurozone and austerity.

            •  Least of three evils, you mean? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              That's probably right.

              Anyway, I suspect the UK, Spain, and Italy will be under left coalitions within a few years. Germany is possible but I doubt it. I'm really not kidding about how lousy the SDP is, and they've been awful for ages. Can't win elections, can't appeal to the electorate. I don't really think the German left ever recovered from Willy Brandt. Before the Gunther Guillaume scandal--which really is like something out of a cheap paperback, and an incredible story if you aren't aware of it--they dominated German politics. Since then, they've been hopeless. Eight years in power since 1980, and while Clinton and Blair were pushing for programs to help the poor and restructure liberal commitments in more efficient ways, Schroeder sucked up up to business and gave the public nothing. And he has been their only Chancellor since the '70s!

  •  DCCC Web Ads on Sequester (6+ / 0-)

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/...

    What I find interesting is the targets, including three Arkansas districts?!

    Rep. Rick Crawford (AR-01)
    Rep. Tim Griffin (AR-02)
    Rep. Tom Cotton (AR-04)
    Rep. Jeff Denham (CA-10)
    Rep. David Valadao (CA-21)
    Rep. Gary Miller (CA-31)
    Rep. Mike Coffman (CO-06)
    Rep. Steve Southerland (FL-02)
    Rep. Dan Webster (FL-10)
    Rep. Bill Young (FL-13)
    Rep. Rodney Davis (IL-13)
    Rep. Jackie Walorski (IN-02)
    Rep. Tom Latham (IA-03)
    Rep. Andy Barr (KY-06)
    Rep. Dan Benishek (MI-01)
    Rep. John Kline (MN-02)
    Rep. Erik Paulsen (MN-03)
    Rep. Steve Daines (MT-AL)
    Rep. Joe Heck (NV-03)
    Rep. Jon Runyan (NJ-03)
    Rep. Michael Grimm (NY-11)
    Rep. Chris Gibson (NY-19)
    Rep. Tom Reed (NY-23)
    Rep. David Joyce (OH-14)
    Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-08)
    Rep. Scott Rigell (VA-02)
    Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (WA-03)

    White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "This is Wendy's guys! This is Wendy's!" - Mitt Romney, October 9, 2012.

    by spiderdem on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:31:48 AM PST

  •  NJ-Gov: What the Revel? (4+ / 0-)

    Did anyone else catch this? Who knows? Maybe this won't mean anything this year. But at some point, this will come back to bite Chris Christie.

    At the very least, 2016 Republican primary voters won't like the idea of a "taxpayer funded casino that fell into bankruptcy".

    •  I hope this becomes an issue this year. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atdnext

      We need all we can get.  although I don't think we win the Governorship this time, I think we ought to give it our all.

      "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

      by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:40:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I pray each and everyday (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atdnext

      that some scandal comes up and takes Christie down. Pisses me off that he looks good right now for re-election. I never considered this guy my Governor to begin with.

      NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

      by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:52:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  huh? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ehstronghold, MichaelNY, skibum59

        you sound like the Tea Partiers who don't consider Obama their president.  Your state voted for him.  It sucks (although honestly Corzine isn't really much better; he's so sleazy it would have been very very tough for me to vote for him) but it's how it is.  Accept it.

        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. -.4.12, -4.92

        by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:47:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why? (0+ / 0-)

          I didn't vote for him. He's the Governor for the people who voted for him. I consider Obama my President, and I wish him success. Had Romney won, the hell I wouldn't consider him my President, and wish him failure. Same for the last President. GWB was not my Pres and Im glad he'll go down in history as a loser President

          NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

          by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:51:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm honestly speechless (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            WisJohn, MichaelNY, skibum59, sacman701

            You sound like the Tea Party.  And I think it's pretty un-American to not wish the Governor success, considering hundreds of thousands in your state will suffer if the economy gets worse.

            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. -.4.12, -4.92

            by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:55:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I didn't vote for Walker. (8+ / 0-)

            But he's still my governor, even though he's a lousy one. I pray for him every night. I pray that he changes his ways. In 2011, when Walker took over, I wanted him to create 250,000 jobs as he promised. We need them here. I just didn't/don't want him reelected.

            As for GWB, the first term was iffy (cause of the loosing-the-popular-vote thing) until 9/11. Then he was my president. He was my president from that day on until '09. Did I like him as a president? No. Did I want him to fail? Not really. He was much better for comic relief than Obama will ever be. Would I have wished Romney failure? No. All I would wish is that he wouldn't be reelected.

            Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, Coya shouldn't have been sent home.

            by WisJohn on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:34:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Of course everybody was going to rally (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              around GWB when 9/11 happened. Who in their right mind wouldn't. Where he went wrong and started losing people was taking us into Iraq. Putting our soldiers into a lethal conditions for a war that was unjustified. Where nearly 5,000 of our troops died out there in the blazing deserts of Iraq, 50,000 wounded. Not to mention the casualties.

              So GWB, I can care less for that man, nor the main culprits in his administration.  

              NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

              by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:01:41 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Don't even get me started (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DownstateDemocrat, gabjoh

                But there is a real difference between war criminals (which I consider Bush and much of his administration to be) and someone who is just a Republican Governor.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:51:38 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Scott Walker is NOT a war criminal (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  Pat Quinn is my governor, and I'm not fond of him (Sears/CME tax break, for example), but he's much better than Walker...and one quality that both of them share is that they're NOT war criminals! George W. Bush, as well as numerous other individuals who served in his administration during his presidency, are war criminals, however.

                  Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

                  by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:56:17 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Let's please distinguish between (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DownstateDemocrat

                    accused war criminal and war criminal. The Bush admin people are accused of being war criminals, and with substantial evidence to back up such a claim. However, until they are convicted by a court and jury composed of their peers of these allegations, they are not "war criminals".

                    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 Feb 21, 2013 at 07:10:06 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Legally, that's true (5+ / 0-)

                      But I will not engage in that kind of beating around the bush, because they will never be tried for their crimes - probably ever, but certainly not in the US. They are unindicted war criminals. Some Nazis were convicted only of conspiring to commit aggression, and by those standards, the case seems pretty open and shut without even considering the civilian casualties and torture. Remember, we're talking about over 4 million displaced people, conservatively over 100,000 dead, and who was responsible for it? If these are just "accused" war criminals, maybe there was no act of aggression, right? Nope, not right. They did it, they are guilty, they just never will face any personal consequences.

                      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                      by MichaelNY on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:50:12 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

  •  MA-SEN: Republicans focusing on video (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dc1000, LordMike, MichaelNY

    of Markey comparing Citizens United to Dred Scott.

    Probably shouldnt have referred to that case, but the analogy was about needing an amendment to overturn Citizens United.

    link.

  •  GA-Sen: Gingrey in (7+ / 0-)

    26, Male, CA-26, DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

    by DrPhillips on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 12:03:38 PM PST

    •  I can't wait for Gingrey to tell us more about why (5+ / 0-)

      he thinks Todd Akin was right.  Between him and Broun, it will be fun(or scary) to see who can be the most anti-science Republican.

      I wonder if that Suffolk guy is ready to paint the Georgia Senate race red or if Dean Chambers is ready to give us unshewed polling of Georgia.

      I agree with President Obama, our country's journey is not yet complete. We must continue the work that our forebearers at Seneca Falls started, and put the Equal Rights Amendment into our Constitution.

      by pistolSO on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:02:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't understand Atlanta suburbanites (3+ / 0-)

        At least the ones closer to the beltway seem pretty normal and reasonable to me, yet they elect these complete teabaggers to Congress by huge margins.  Gingrey's district even reaches into North Atlanta and Buckhead which is very affluent and well-educated yet Gingrey believes Todd Akin science.  Tom Price is a nut, too.  Hopefully if Gingrey really does run in the Senate primary Atlanta can find a sane human being to replace him.

        I know Broun's district though - further out in the sticks - yup, he represents his constituents pretty well.

        •  the districts are drawn to be safe for Republicans (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          even crazy ones.

          ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 01:49:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  i'd always assumed those areas are populated by (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JGibson, LordMike, MichaelNY

          what I call "white christian zionists" who are people from bluer states who are looking for somewhere else to live. Of course Georgia has a large non-white population but, like TX, seems to be a magnet for hard right wingers.

          RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

          by demographicarmageddon on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:58:31 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Gingrey said that Akin was half-right (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pistolSO, MichaelNY

        Still, even a half-defense of Todd Akin's "legitimate rape" remarks shows that there are Republicans out there who actually believe in what Akin said.

        Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

        by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:07:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  He also agreed (6+ / 0-)

        with Stephen Colbert's sarcastic suggestion that gay individuals could be denied drivers licenses when he appeared on "Better Know a District."

        ...and he said that he was a "Georgia peach," so there's that.

        19, FL-07 (school), MD-07 (home). UCF sophomore, politically ambitious, vocally liberal--what else could you need to know?

        by tqycolumbia on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:13:45 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  quick analysis of the four GA-CDs that may be open (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      psychicpanda, lordpet8

      GA1 (Kingston):

      The only whole counties in this district where the Dem beat her average were Liberty (which she won) and Chatham (which she lost 53-47 while Obama won it 56-43). There were 145K votes outside of Chatham and 105K votes in Chatham in 2012. Roy Barnes did win Clinch and McIntosh counties in 2010. But he won 50-45 in Chatham. So a D would have to win by an astounding margin in Savannah. I'd imagine the R nominee should be from Savannah anyways. Not entirely sure that Kingston will bail though, he has 20 years in the House and this is far from a good deal for him.

      GA6 (Price):

      District borders Gingrey's in Cobb and Fulton. Price won 65-70% in Cobb/Fulton in 2010 but 54% in DeKalb. 136K in Fulton, 91K in Cobb and 65K in DeKalb. Seat probably stays with a North Fulton Republican.

      GA10 (Broun):

      Obama won a few parts of this district while Broun was unopposed (Baldwin, part of Clarke [they dropped 5K Clarke voters that were even more D in GA9 for some reason], Hancock, Jefferson, Taliaferro, Warren, Washington. The undervote in GA10 was 84K votes, including over half of the Clarke votes. The next R Congressman will likely be from Gwinnett/Walton/Henry or somewhere that's probably an exurb.

      GA11 (Gingrey):

      Basically the district is made up of Bartow/Cherokee where Gingrey topped 75% and Cobb/Fulton where Gingrey was between 59% (Cobb) and 69.8% (North Buckhead in Fulton). Odds are that the next Congressman will be a Republican from Cherokee County. But it'll be interesting for the purposes of reference if Cobb is any more friendly to a Dem v. a non-Cobb Republican. Gingrey's district went from something shot out of a paintball gun (2002-2004 district) to condensed North-Central Georgia from Cobb to Rome (2006-2010) to the current district.

      As for Presidential numbers

      GA01: 56/43 Romney
      GA06: 61/38 Romney
      GA10: 63/36 Romney
      GA11: 67/32 Romney

      So maybe this shakeup will produce something that will go well somehow. Who knows. But it'll likely be 4 solid Rs.

      The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

      by RBH on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:43:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A runoff between Broun and Gingrey. (5+ / 0-)

      God doesn't love us that much.

      Still waiting on Price and Handel. I'm doubting Price will jump in now.

      http://www.snappac.org/ Students for a New American Politics!

      by redrelic17 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:27:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  PA-Supremes (5+ / 0-)

    Vacancy forthcoming!

    Suspended state Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin was convicted Thursday of six of seven campaign corruption charges while her sister Janine Orie was convicted of the six counts she faced....

    The sisters were found guilty of theft of services and criminal conspiracy.

    They were charged with conspiring to use Melvin's state-funded judicial staff — and the state-funded staff of a third sister, former state Sen. Jane Orie — to campaign for the Supreme Court when Melvin was a Superior Court judge in 2003 and 2009.

    Eventually:
    Orie Melvin's conviction does not automatically lead to her removal as a justice, Graci [of the Judicial Conduct Board] said, and there are three ways that she could be removed.

    The state constitution does not allow public officials to hold office if they have been convicted of an "infamous crime," Graci said.

    The trial judge in Orie Melvin's case could find that her crime was one of infamy and enter an order that she be removed from office, Graci said, but Orie Melvin would have the right to appeal any such order.

    The House of Representatives also could file articles of impeachment against Orie Melvin, and then the Senate could try Orie Melvin on whether to remove her from office, Graci said.

    When there is a vacancy, Corbett appoints with the consent of the Senate, election in 2015 for a full term.
  •  WI-Sup. Ct: I spoke with Fallone's Finance Team (5+ / 0-)

    today, and I am a little freaked out.  First, evening though I live in Indiana, I offered to do minimal fundraising and virtual phone banking.  I asked about the "feeling of the race," and the sweet girl of the phone remarked that they are "disappointed" Roggensack did so well throughout the state (even thought less than 350,000 votes were cast).  I asked about independent expenditures, and they have no clue if anyone will jump in (unions, liberal groups) will drop money on Falllone's behalf.  I am extremely disappointed and depressed now.  Ugh!  If I were a multi-millionare I would totally throw down a million or so for this race -- it's so important and Roggensack is so dangerous.

    Praying for a miracle, lol.

    27, male, gay, living with and loving my partner of over 4 years in downtown Indianapolis (IN-7).

    by IndyLiberal on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:32:55 PM PST

    •  Is there any Democrat/progressive in Wisconsin... (0+ / 0-)

      ...who actually knows how to organize a campaign/political movement? It seems to me that the one thing Democrats/progressives in Wisconsin are absolutely horrible at (with a few exceptions) is political organization. That's the only reason the GOP even has any significant foothold in Wisconsin whatsoever.

      Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

      by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:01:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Really? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WisJohn, MichaelNY, skibum59

        It has nothing to do with the fact that 48% of Wisconsinites will vote Republican in a generic presidential election?

        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. -.4.12, -4.92

        by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:17:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  For one thing, it is very hard to unseat a sitting (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stephen Wolf, MichaelNY, skibum59

        Supreme Court Justice in this state. It has only happened two times in state history. The fact that we came oh so close in 2011 was just because of the situation the state was going through that spring. The climate isn't that heated anymore. Yes, Walker and the GOP is still pulling the same shit, but regular people are tired of the fights. For now, the people of Wisconsin are stuck with the GOP. We voted them in, and we are suffering the consequences.

        Why don't you get your ass up off your computer chair and get up here and do some organizing if you are the 'Friend of the WI uprising' you say you are, and you think our organizing is crappy? Go up to counties like Rusk, and Marathon, and Oconto, and Washburn, and convert more people to the progressive movement. Go into Milwaukee and get the people there to show up to vote, and get them to vote the Democratic/liberal candidate straight down the ballot (if JoKlop would have gotten all the votes that Abele got, she would be on the
        SSC right now).

        For the most part, the uprising is over. The Kochs squashed it. God bless the Solidarity Singers for keeping the pressure on the GOP at the capitol every day, but the uprising is over. Period. We did mount a successful campaign in getting the recall on the ballot. No one thought we could get the needed signatures, but we doubled what we needed. A lot of people worked their asses off doing it, to. The failing was the choice of candidates we were given.

        To conclude, the 'fire in the belly' isn't there to knock off Roggensack. Unfortunately. Sorry.

        Sorry for being so brash, but your comment really irked me.

        Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, Coya shouldn't have been sent home.

        by WisJohn on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:01:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who are you directing this comment at? (0+ / 0-)

          27, male, gay, living with and loving my partner of over 4 years in downtown Indianapolis (IN-7).

          by IndyLiberal on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:41:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Come to think of it... (0+ / 0-)

          ...I shouldn't have singled out one state in my comment, and I apologize. Democrats here in Illinois are absolutely horrid at organizing campaigns, and the state Democratic party here is rife with constant infighting between various factions, but we've somehow managed to get huge majorities in both houses of the Illinois General Assembly.

          Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

          by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:47:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  IL Dems have majorities because (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KingofSpades, Skaje, MichaelNY

            there is just a higher percentage of Dems in IL than WI. Plus the spectacular Madiganmander.

            Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, Coya shouldn't have been sent home.

            by WisJohn on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:54:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The IL Dem party doesn't care about anything... (0+ / 0-)

              ...outside of Cook County, unless, of course, they can gerrymander themselves an advantage somewhere downstate. Also, given how polarized our country has become, if a political party (such as the Republicans in Wisconsin and the Democrats in Illinois) control the redistricting process, that is a much bigger advantage for that party in any particular state than, say, 40 years ago.

              Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

              by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:59:45 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  So people like Frerichs' and the like (0+ / 0-)

                play kind of second fiddle to the Cook County legislative leaders at all times and are okay with the diminished role they're given?

                "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

                by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:11:48 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Frerichs isn't in any leadership posititon (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  KingofSpades

                  Also, I'm not 100% certain of this, but, isn't James Clayborne, Jr. is the only Democratic state legislator in Illinois who is from outside of the Chicago area and is in any sort of leadership position in either house of the General Assembly? I may be wrong about that, though.

                  Mike Madigan and his ilk run the Illinois Democratic party, and I consider them to be political adversaries within my own party.

                  Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

                  by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:16:58 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I know, but was just naming him (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    as a example of a prominent non-Chicagoland legislator.

                    "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

                    by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:18:54 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  this happens in general (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    Gygaxian was just complaining about how SLC-centric the Utah Party was.  I could say the same thing here about Portland and Eugene.  OGGoldy talked about geographic polarization in the MN legislature.

                    ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 09:51:09 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Also, regarding Wisconsin Supreme Court races... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              ...it seems as if would probably take either a dirty campaign or a major scandal for an incumbent to lose re-election. There seems to be much larger incumbency advantage surrounding a state supreme court election in Wisconsin than most other elections there.

              Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

              by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:07:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  that could be said in general (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                I don't know the last time a sitting supreme court justice has lost a race here.

                ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 09:45:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  Oh I love how deliciously random that map is! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    emops, lordpet8, MichaelNY

    I'd personally love to meet the people who thought that, for some reason, that the very northwestern part of Georgia just needs to be it's own state.

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

    by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:39:35 PM PST

    •  because without it (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WisJohn, MichaelNY, NMLib

      we might be able to win the rest of the state.

      On the other hand, I'd hate to be crossing state lines every time I go to campus.  Multnomah shall never be an independent state!

      ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 04:29:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  re the national journal rankings (5+ / 0-)

    aren't those just party voting adherence where people are ranked as more "liberal" because they voted with Democrats more when the majority of Dems voted one way and the majority of Republicans another?

    I remember a couple of years ago they had someone like Blanche Lincoln as more "liberal" than Russ Feingold or some bullshit like that.

  •  Ambassador Schweitzer? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, LordMike, itskevin, jncca, MichaelNY

    Toronto's National Post reported a few weeks ago that Schweitzer is under consideration to be Ambassador to Canada, along with:

    * Caroline Kennedy
    * Former Gov. Christine Gregoire (D-WA)
    * Former Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D-MI)
    * Former Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
    * Mayor Dave Bing (Detroit)
    •  Under consideration or just candidates that would (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, gabjoh

      make some sense given their closeness to the Canadian border and being currently out of a job.  

      Schweitzer would make zero sense for the gig because on the only issue he breaks from most Dems on his strong support of the XKL pipeline.  

      Besides I don't think Schweitzer would want to move to Ottawa, when he doesn't want to move to DC.

      I think Gregoire can have it if she wants it as it looks like she'll get shut out of the Cabinet.  

      Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:47:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'd still be in Indiana :( (0+ / 0-)

    Though South Bend is on the outer edges of Chicagoland.

    25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

    by HoosierD42 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 02:55:07 PM PST

  •  NRSC reports their Jan numbers (5+ / 0-)

    They only raised 1.5 million.

    They have 3.3 million on hand(a little more than Dems) and 10 million in debt.

    Roll Call.

  •  I might diary this, but I don't really have any (11+ / 0-)

    knowledge of the local particulars that might explain the patterns, but anyway here's a map of Elizabeth Warren's improvement over Martha Coakley by town:

     photo MATownsbySenateWarren-Coakley_zps9e06ebd2.png

  •  PPP and Hillary (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ArkDem14, lordpet8, skibum59, psychicpanda

    doesn't reflect so much on Montana and redness, but on what we already know from 2008... Clinton has more strength in Appalachia and the South than Obama, and much less appeal in the West than Obama.

    If there is a "danger" in Clinton's numbers is she could get a lot closer in the South and Appalachia than Obama did but still lose those states, while also losing Colorado or Nevada against (Latino) Rubio or (gaming friendly) Christie.

    At this point, Clinton looks like a (relative to everything else) weakish candidate for Montana or Arizona, but a Schweitzer or Hickenlooper VP could be a response to that.

    Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

    by tommypaine on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:27:55 PM PST

    •  Nah, she'll at least clean up... (6+ / 0-)

      Here. If Rory Reid could beat Brian Sandoval 2-1 among Latin@ voters in 2010, Hillary Clinton can surely do at least as well against Marco Rubio in 2016. And considering how much Latin@ support she got in the 2008 Caucus DESPITE Culinary whipping members for Obama, I think she has a good idea on how to run up the score here in Clark County.

      And as I've said before, I doubt Christie can ever get anywhere near the Republican nomination.

      •  Rubio's nothing for Hispanics... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skibum59, DCCyclone

        At least in our neck of the woods. The Hispanic vote in Nevada and New Mexico are almost entirely Mexican, Rubio is Cuban, outside of a Spanish-sounding surname, there really isn't any more of a special bond between them and between Hispanics and a black dude named Barack Obama.

        That being said, where I would worry about Clinton (and, as I've said countless times, I don't think Clinton runs) would be states like Washington and Oregon (where she's never really been all that popular) and the upper Midwest (Iowa of course, but also Wisconsin and Minnesota, she's never had a strong base in any of those states).

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

        by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:01:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You think she'd lose Washington and Oregon? (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lordpet8, James Allen, MichaelNY, skibum59

          Or at least put it at risk? And that everyone else in the country likes her now with the exception of Washingtonians and Oregonians?

          •  There was polling in 2008 (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DCCyclone

            By SUSA (so take with a grain of salt I suppose) that had her tied or behind in both states.

            Times have changed, though, and I can't see her being even close to that meager level of support.

            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 Feb 21, 2013 at 04:16:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Not lose but... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gabjoh

            But not get Obama's margins either, and yes I do think she'll have to fight for them (they're still Democratic-leaning, but Clinton was never that popular in either state). I've said this a million times before, but if Clinton runs, her numbers will never stay as high as they are, she's in a relatively nonpartisan position where she doesn't have to stick her neck out on a lot of controversial issues. But if she runs, she's a much bigger target for Republicans, and there are a lot of people who will remember that they didn't like her all that much.

            And, I didn't just say Washington and Oregon, I also mentioned Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. I'm mentioning regions where Clinton is likely to be weaker than Obama is, I don't think I'm being uncontroversial.

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

            by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:20:44 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I can assure you that Clintom wouldn't (0+ / 0-)

              be weaker in the midwest. She might have a different coalition, but there probably won't be a noticeable difference.

              •  It's a region she ran weaker than Obama in... (0+ / 0-)

                And it's one she has very few ties to, it's why Obama beat her, badly, in the primaries and caucuses there. So I can assure you that she will run weaker in that region.

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

                by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:35:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  aside from, you know, (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  being from Illinois.

                  ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 04:38:08 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Except the fact that she was born and (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  raised in Chicago. Yeah, very few ties! Oh, and it was a DEMOCRATIC primary. I doubt many of those primary voters would defect to a Republican candidate. And the reason why he did so well in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota was because he was the Senator from Illinois.

                  •  Fine, she has no POLITICAL ties... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    gabjoh

                    Which, for my purposes, is really the same thing. That she was born and raised in Chicago is nice, but it's pretty much irrelevant about giving her any meaningful ties to Midwest states like Wisconsin, Minnesota, or Iowa.

                    And I'm not really concerned about why she ran weaker than Obama, she clearly ran weaker than Obama, you aren't denying that, and if Hillary Clinton weakens nationally (which, I'm going to repeat, is inevitable), then a problem region for her, relative to Obama, will be the upper Midwest states.

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

                    by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:09:02 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  I think it's a bit of a stretch (5+ / 0-)

                  to automatically assume a candidate will do worse in the general election in a state because they lost it in the primary.  Barack Obama dominated in the Deep South primaries, but I don't think it follows that Clinton would have done worse in those states had she been the nominee.  Clinton also won convincingly in the California primary, but I see no evidence that she would have been able to top Obama's numbers in that state.

                  Ultimately, I think Clinton would put up similar numbers to other Democrats in the midwest.  That is, if she runs, which I am apparently alone here in thinking that she will not.

            •  Hillary has no problem in ANY of those states (4+ / 0-)

              She won't win by Obama's 2008 blowout margins, they would be more like Obama's 2012 margins, but she wouldn't have any trouble there.

              She'd have the most trouble in Obama states that Democrats didn't win before Obama, except when Perot threw a monkey wrench into things in the 90s.  But even there, I think Nevada and New Mexico would be safe for her.  Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, and maybe Florida could be tougher, but Florida might very well be actually stronger for her not any tougher.  I think she'd lose NC by considerably more than Obama, but likely single-digits.

              Really Obama has been an accelerant for demographic shift that will benefit all Democrats going forward.  A Republican cannot win going forward without uniform swing in what were the 08/12 battlegrounds, and that swing will be tougher to come by.  It probably has to come by itself by way of an anti-Democratic environment, it's not something the GOP can manufacture.

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

              by DCCyclone on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:35:06 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, DCCyclone

                for all this talk about how the map would change based on the nominees, I strongly suspect the 2016 map of contested states will start out looking rather familiar: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin.  Maybe Arizona, Georgia, Montana, and Missouri if it's a Dem wave, maybe Michigan, Minnesota, and New Mexico if it's a GOP wave.  That's it.

              •  For North Carolina (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                Clinton wouldn't do as well with African Americans and young people as Obama, but she'd do much better with traditional, Mike Easley Democrats.

                25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

                by HoosierD42 on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 07:14:26 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You say that based on what? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  Bill Clinton didn't do any such thing, he got 43% and then 44% in his two tries there.

                  Why would Hillary do any better?

                  I think she would have a chance to outperform Bill's absolute vote share, but still lose a 2-way by bigger margins than Bill did since Bill had Perot's help.

                  There's been a tendency to badly overstate Hillary's appeal to culturally conservative whites.  She does a little better than Obama, but not night-and-day.  There are not very many who will swing based on who the modern Democrats nominate, and Hillary ultimately is a liberal and will come off as such.

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

                  by DCCyclone on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 10:07:46 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Washington and Oregon are too blue for that (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, MichaelNY

          Gore wasn't a great fit for them either and he did just fine.  Any state Gore won, Hillary would win too, unless she lost in a blowout, except maybe Iowa and Pennsylvania.

          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. -.4.12, -4.92

          by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:22:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  and Wisconsin and Minnesota as you mentioned (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Skaje

            In a 50-50 election vs. Generic R (I'll say Bob McDonnell just because he's pretty generic)

            Likely D: Washington, Maine, New Jersey
            Lean D: Oregon, Minnesota, New Mexico, Michigan
            Tilt D: Wisconsin, Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio
            Tilt R: Iowa, Florida
            Lean R: Virginia (only because of McDonnell; otherwise it's Tilt R), North Carolina

            I don't think Hillary brings unique strengths to the table.  I think West Virginia, Kentucky, and Arkansas are unwinnable unless we have a blowout.  What Hillary brings is national strength.  Her path to victory is basically Obama's, except I think he's stronger in Iowa and weaker in Ohio.

            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. -.4.12, -4.92

            by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:26:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Gore won Washington by 6 (0+ / 0-)

            He won Oregon by less than half of a percent, so they were battlegrounds.

            I'm not saying that Hillary Clinton will lose those states or that she's not the favorite in those states, but I don't think she shuts them down either, she keeps them in play which means that Republicans force her to play more defense than Obama had to.

            And personally, I don't get why so many people have no problem whatsoever believing that a Democrat who plays stronger in Appalachia might not be invincible in other regions?

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

            by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:32:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  and since then (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DCCyclone, skibum59

              in 2012 Obama won the rest of Oregon outside of Multnomah County (Portland) by something like 20,000 more votes than Gore won the whole state by, and Multnomah County added more registered Democrats in that period than the entire number of people who voted for John McCain in eastern Oregon in 2008, we picked off Gordon Smith, and took both houses of the state legislature, which were both in R hands in 2000.

              ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 04:36:33 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  And I don't deny any of that (0+ / 0-)

                Obama ran very strong in Oregon on his own. But, on the other hand, Oregon has probably moved more Democratic than it was before.

                What I'm saying is that Hillary Clinton will run weaker than Obama in Oregon and Washington, and that I believe it will be enough that Hillary Clinton will have to fight for it, and that diverts money from other swing-states and prevents her from expanding the map.

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

                by NMLib on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:47:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Well, I don't think she's too much stronger (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Skaje, DCCyclone

              in Appalachia.  I think she's worth about five points, but about three of those five points are based on her not being Black.  In Oregon she probably loses us a point.  Gore came so close to losing because of Nader.  He got over 5% in Oregon. The left-right vote was 52.0-47.6%.

              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. -.4.12, -4.92

              by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:38:03 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  People forget Nader (6+ / 0-)

                But he really did depress Gore's numbers in a lot of liberal areas.  Multnomah went 64-28-7 for Gore, then 72-27 for Kerry.  Pretty obvious what happened there.  A lot of Kerry's improvements over Gore (despite doing worse nationally) happened as a result of picking up Nader's voters in liberal areas of the West, which were significant.

                In any case, I think we can stop worrying about losing Oregon or Washington in 2016, unless we're already losing the national vote by 10 points.  They're simply too much bluer than the national average at this point, regardless of which nominee we put up.  And assuming which type of nominee they are likely to pick, the GOP will have even less ability to appeal to WA and OR, and will probably be focused on taking Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, Virginia, etc.

                This whole conversation is silly...we are talking about the electoral impacts of West Virginia and Kentucky getting bluer, and Oregon and Washington getting redder...which would do absolutely nothing in a close election.  None of the four states will be competitive in 2016 barring a landslide one way or the other.

  •  As a resident of Red Wisconsin, I have an idea (9+ / 0-)

    of what Red Wisconsin may mean.

    In Central Wisconsin, especially the counties surrounding and including Wood County, there is lots of iron (I think its iron) in the soil, and it makes the soil have a strong red hue. In fact, the gravel roads in the area even have a strong red hue. I call the area 'red rock country'.

    Not sure this is correct, as the further away you get from Wood County, the less red the soil is, even not red as all, but this is just an idea of mine.

    Blue Wisconsin may have something to do with the lack of iron in the soil. There is a town outside Madison called Blue Mounds.

    Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, Coya shouldn't have been sent home.

    by WisJohn on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:30:44 PM PST

  •  Adam Putnam = howdy doody lookin nimrod (5+ / 0-)

    for those of you kno what Im talkin bout lol.

    NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

    by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:37:42 PM PST

  •  Under that map, Nevada would... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lordpet8, James Allen

    Be a VERY Red State. However, Vegas would be a decently Blue State. Under this map, Nataqua would have gone to Romney somewhat narrowly while Nevada would have been a blowout for Romney... And of course, Obama would have won Vegas by double digits.

    We'd now have Senators Harry Reid (D-Vegas) and Shelley Berkley (D-Vegas)... Or perhaps replace Berkley with Senator Dina Titus (D-Vegas).

    Meanwhile, Dean Heller & Mark Amodei would be perfectly situated in Nataqua. I have some wild ideas as to who would represent Nevada.

    •  At first I read "Nataqua" as "Naquadah" (0+ / 0-)

      I've been watching too much Stargate, lol.

    •  Oregon would have to pick new (0+ / 0-)

      senators, as both Merkley and Wyden live in Multnomah.  And while that'd hurt Democratic prospects to lose that county, losing Southern Oregon and the eastern border counties would still leave Oregon Dems in a decent position.  Kerry won the smaller state of Oregon with 50.38% of the vote, and I think it's a decent bet that Peter DeFazio (who would've replaced Mark Hatfield in 1996, the year in which he did run for senate but in reality lost the primary to Wyden) and Greg Walden (who would not be so conservative, since he doesn't represent such deep red territory) would represent the state in the US Senate.

      The biggest cities in the state would be Eugene and Salem, but Washington County would be the most populous county.

      If we're really taking this counterfactual back, Kitzhaber may have ended up in the state of Jefferson, since he started his political career in Douglas County.  In fact the other Dem who ran in the primary in 2010, Bill Bradbury, would also be from Jefferson, as he's from Coos County.  Who knows who our governor would be... Kurt Schrader?  Chris Dudley?

      ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 05:21:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  And what do you know, the charade continues (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

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

    “There are a number of people who are still talking about running for the U.S. Senate, and I think she would be a very serious candidate, and there may be others that would be also,” Beshear said. “But I’m going to encourage as many as possible to take a look at it.”
    It's like they're playing a game of the emperor's new clothes and I find it really bizarre that someone like Beshear would comment on it at this stage. Have they utterly given up trying to recruit someone who might actual have a shot at winning?
    •  I don't think that's what Beshear meant. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, MichaelNY, itskevin

      He did say other people are looking at the race.

      •  "I think she would be a very serious candidate" (4+ / 0-)

        this is a total lie and he knows it. She is not a serious candidate. I don't care if she brings money, she'll lose in a massive blowout.

        Grimes, Conway, Mongiardo, Luallen, those are serious candidates even if they raise half of what Judd does.

        •  She is serious (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          askew, skibum59, gabjoh

          I'm not a fan of her for KY-Sen either, but I think some are going too far in the Judd-bashing.  She's a serious candidate.  She isn't Christine O'Donnell or Alvin Greene.  She's Rick Santorum 2006.  He was a serious candidate, he just didn't fit the state.

          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. -.4.12, -4.92

          by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:28:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  So everybody is lying and only you know the truth (0+ / 0-)

          Good to know.  

          Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

          by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:28:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, I just have enough sense to know that (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen, WisJohn, MichaelNY, betelgeux

            a liberal who bashes coal can't win in Kentucky. It's not that complicated. She could spend 50 million dollars and still lose and I guarantee you if you asked the top Dem consultants in the state whether they thought she could win they would all tell you no if they were truthful.

            And I didn't say anyone other than Beshear was lying. He knows what it takes to win in the state and knows what it's like to lose to McConnell.

            •  If she's so wounded... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              itskevin, askew

              Why is none of the list you rattled off willing to run against her and run to take on McConnell?  

              Bad mouth her until your blue in the face, but she's the only candidate showing any gumption to even consider running.  

              Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

              by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:45:39 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  That she's the only candidate is irrelevant (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, Skaje

                and you're completely changing the subject. I said she can't win and you basically accused me of being a conspiracy theorist and when I gave you reasons why you talk about how no one else is running. Nice non-sequitur.

                Her being a horrible candidate and people like Grimes not wanting to tarnish their "rising star" by losing McConnell are two independent factors. And let's be serious, McConnell is going to have tens of millions of dollars if he faces someone like Grimes and he'll be very difficult to beat, regardless of what people say to pollsters 2 years out.

                •  So we should run nobody against McConnell? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  wwmiv, askew

                  You call a positive mention a charade and a lie and then name drop "Grimes, Conway, Mongiardo, Luallen" none of which have shown any inclination to run.  And now you say that they'd all be long shots anyways - so why would the run as extreme long shots and hurt their future chances either vs Paul in 2016 or to run for open seat Gov in 2016?

                  And if nobody else is stepping up why is it bad for Judd to throw her hat in the ring and put some money where her mouth is in the state?

                  Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

                  by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:03:00 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  There you go again putting words into my mouth (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    James Allen, MichaelNY

                    I never said they'd be a long shot and not even close, just that they'd more likely than not lose. If the national environment is favorable enough, someone like Luallen might be able to win as she probably would have in 2008 instead of Lunsford. Regardless though, every single one of them would do significantly better than Judd.

                    The reason it's bad for Judd to run is because there's this thing called coattails and if all the coal country conservadems don't want to turnout because they don't like Judd much, then we stand a risk of losing the legislature. Maybe that wouldn't happen and we'd be just fine downballot, but why the hell would we want to risk it, especially if McConnell somehow got teabagged (very small chance) and we end up with two fucking Rand Paul clones.

                    If Judd really wants to run for senate and wage a losing campaign while standing up for progressive values, why the hell not run against Lamar Alexander who basically has the exact same voting record as McConnell, especially on key votes. She has much better options than running for senate in Kentucky, so to answer jncca and sacman's points, that's why I don't think of her campaign as serious. Sure she's not a joke like John Raese, but that doesn't make her a credible candidate and it's precisely because A) she has much better options and B) Kentucky Democrats have much better options.

        •  this is overdoing it (11+ / 0-)

          Judd is a Kennedy School grad, a good public speaker, and would be able to raise enough money to run a real campaign. She's a serious candidate, she's just too liberal to have a good chance to win in KY. Carly Fiorina was a serious candidate, she was just too conservative to have much of a chance in CA.

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

          by sacman701 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:53:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  that's not how I read it (5+ / 0-)

      Looks to me like Beshear is trying to give the A-listers a kick in the butt without publicly dissing Judd.

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

      by sacman701 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:40:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Can the Republicans Be Saved From Obsolescence? (4+ / 0-)

    Found neat article about shortcomings the GOP has with technology, young voters and campaign infrastructure

    But the problem for the G.O.P. extends well beyond its flawed candidate and his flawed operation. The unnerving truth, which the Red Edge team and other younger conservatives worry that their leaders have yet to appreciate, is that the Republican Party’s technological deficiencies barely begin to explain why the G.O.P. has lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. The party brand — which is to say, its message and its messengers — has become practically abhorrent to emerging demographic groups like Latinos and African-Americans, not to mention an entire generation of young voters. As one of the party’s most highly respected strategists told me: “It ought to concern people that the most Republican part of the electorate under Ronald Reagan were 18-to-29-year-olds. And today, people I know who are under 40 are embarrassed to say they’re Republicans. They’re embarrassed! They get harassed for it, the same way we used to give liberals a hard time.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/...
    Several G.O.P. digital specialists told me that, in addition, they found it difficult to recruit talent because of the values espoused by the party. “I know a lot of people who do technology for a living,” Turk said. “And almost universally, there’s a libertarian streak that runs through them — information should be free, do your own thing and leave me alone, that sort of mind-set. That’s very much what the Internet is. And almost to a person that I’ve talked to, they say, ‘Yeah, I would probably vote for Republicans, but I can’t get past the gay-marriage ban, the abortion stance, all of these social causes.’ Almost universally, they see a future where you have more options, not less. So questions about whether you can be married to the person you want to be married to just flies in the face of the future. They don’t want to be part of an organization that puts them squarely on the wrong side of history.”

    In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

    by lordpet8 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:27:35 PM PST

  •  Pew: Obama's pop. peaks with Latinos (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, askew, MichaelNY

    "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

    by KingofSpades on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 04:40:45 PM PST

    •  If immigration reform passes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      it's Obama's accomplishment, and the Tea Party gets angry. If reform fails, it's Republicans' fault, and they remain behoden to the Tea Party. Pretty well encapsulates the Republican dilemma these days.

  •  SC-1. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32

    I'd have to think that Mark Sanford and Teddy Turner are the frontrunners to make top two. Because money.

    •  Disagree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf

      I think Turner can spend as much money as he wants, but he's still a joke candidate.  Sanford is also a joke, but at least he has been elected before.  I think it's very likely one of the state legislators makes the top two, and quite possibly both Sanford and Turner get shut out in favor of serious candidates.  Money only gets you so far.

    •  This one's more unpredictable than IL-2 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, JBraden

      I'd say that Robin Kelly has a 90% chance of winning the IL-2 Democratic primary, if not greater than that. The SC-1 Republican primary, on the other hand, doesn't appear to have a clear favorite.

      There are more factors to winning and losing elections than money.

      Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

      by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:01:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agree, SC-01 is COMPLETELY unpredictable (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JBraden, MichaelNY

        I think it's truly wide open, there's no way to guess who comes out on top.  Larry Grooms seems to be getting some traction from serious party operatives.  But it's really anyone's to win.  It's too divided a field, and it's a special election, and that renders money less decisive especially when more than one has it.

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

        by DCCyclone on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:27:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  ain't DKE related but (0+ / 0-)

    What do people think about O'Brian firing and her chance of going to MSNBC?

    NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

    by BKGyptian89 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 05:18:30 PM PST

  •  The State of Huerfano (7+ / 0-)

    For what it's worth, my great-great-uncle, Sam Taylor, the longest serving Colorado State Senator in history, was the largest proponent of the never-actually-founded State of Huerfano, which was to be largely formed from the southern Colorado Huerfano County (as the name suggests) because northern Colorado was getting too much in state money.

    I'm thrilled to see that his quirky legacy lives on through the historical record of his failed proposal.

    19, FL-07 (school), MD-07 (home). UCF sophomore, politically ambitious, vocally liberal--what else could you need to know?

    by tqycolumbia on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:04:39 PM PST

  •  From WHAS11 tonight in Louisville (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, Stephen Wolf, James Allen

    http://www.whas11.com/...

    Looking at Ashley Judd's tweets. One about opposing coal power plants and another supporting gay marriage. I think Sen. McConnell might have produced this spot tonight.

    "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 Feb 21, 2013 at 06:08:55 PM PST

    •  She's DOA as a candidate (4+ / 0-)

      As I've said and have been only one of many, she'll lose by 20 like Obama did last year.  If she keeps it down to 10 or so, I'd be stunned.

      The "Democratic strategist" interviewed in the story you linked is a bit of a tool for saying national Democrats want her to run.  This is Judd's own baby to consider this, the DSCC folks are smart and know she can't win.  But she's a high-profile good Democrat and they don't want to piss her off by stepping on her, there are ramifications of that going beyond KY-Sen and going beyond Judd herself.  So they're tiptoeing around the subject of her possible candidacy.

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

      by DCCyclone on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:09:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone, Stephen Wolf, MichaelNY

        If she runs for anything, I think she'd be better off primary-challenging Jim Cooper in TN-05.  This diary makes a pretty good case for just that.

        •  The House is a waste of time. (0+ / 0-)

          Unless you have 30+ years to invest in it.  Not to mention you're going to be in the minority for the next 10 years.

          Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

          by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:41:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Do you ever say anything useful? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen, JDJase, MichaelNY

            Of course the house is worth it, god forbid we get rid of someone who voted against Sandy relief in a district that has basically never gone Republican.

            Jim Cooper should be a disgrace and it's amazing that he hasn't gotten a serious primary challenge like Al Wynn did a few years back.

            •  It's a waste of time for Judd. (0+ / 0-)

              As you say it's a Dem seat, so it wouldn't help us pick up a seat.  Jim Cooper is in it - you don't like how he votes, but it doesn't make much sense for a 45 yr old multi-millioniare to choose to be one of 435 and in the minority for the next decade versus being one of 100 in a majority.  When all she would be accomplishing is moving the Tennessee seat a bit more to the left versus running a David vs Goliath campaign to take out the GOP Senate Minority Leader when nobody else wants to step up.  

              Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

              by Jacoby Jonze on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 06:49:17 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  She's a big girl. (0+ / 0-)

        If she's really a down ballot drag and has no shot at winning and is keeping better candidates out - the DSCC or DNC or somebody should simply tell her that.  

        Any Ky Democrat staying out because they are afraid of Judd in the primary damn sure isn't going to have the gumption to take on McConnell anyways.

        Is the Rove attacks reverse psychology or something? To trick her into thinking "Gee, Karl Rove is attacking me to try and get me to choose not to run - it must mean he see's me as a threat so I am surely going to run".  

        Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

        by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:46:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No Kentucky Dem is afraid of Judd (6+ / 0-)

          They're all afraid of McConnell.  That's why Judd is discussed seriously as a potential nominee, because no one else wants to be.

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

          by DCCyclone on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:09:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  definitely (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, DCCyclone

            they have tons of conservadems who will vote in the primary who will not vote for Judd.

            ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 09:25:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  And also non-conserva-dems (0+ / 0-)

              ...like hopefully our users here who live in Kentucky. (Then again, is the "general election viability" vote ever a significant one, except maybe in pushing down the percentages people like Kucinich get in presidential primaries?)

              Vaccinate your child. Vaccinate yourself. | Pro-transit, pro-gun, anti-NRA young black urban progressive | SSP/DKE | -9, -7.79 | MO-05 | Yard signs don't vote. | Hutchinson for IL-02!

              by gabjoh on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 04:35:48 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  So then what's the big deal about Judd running? (0+ / 0-)

            So you're saying you'd rather have nobody run against McConnell?

            Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

            by Jacoby Jonze on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 06:33:28 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, I'm not saying that (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              I'm fine with Judd running as long as she doesn't hurt downballot, and I'm guessing it unlikely she does.  But then we have no real federal opportunities there anyway, Yarmuth is it and he's safe, so it doesn't matter for those of us outside Kentucky.

              The only other thing that makes me uneasy about Judd is if McConnell gets teabagged, and then we blow it against an absolute clown because Judd is just too liberal for Kentuckians to stomach.  But I'm skeptical of McConnell getting teabagged, he's doing everything he can to prevent it.  But I've been skeptical several times and been dead-wrong the past couple cycles, so my track record is not so good in that regard.

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

              by DCCyclone on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 10:11:21 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  State of Winneconne (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone

    Here's the story behind that:

    In 1967, the state of Wisconsin published a set of official road maps. Unfortunately, the town of Winneconne (west of Oshkosh) was somehow omitted. The citizens went into an uproar, and when Wisconsin Governor Warren Knowles assured the town the omission was merely an oversight, they made him chairman of a contest to put Winneconne back on the map. Two girls from Washington, D.C. urged the town to secede from the United States and declare war. On July 22, village President James Coughlin did just that. To raise revenues, a tollbooth was erected at the Wolf River, which collected $7. Just before the close of business hours, Governor Knowles called President Coughlin and urged him to rejoin the Union. After negotiations, Winneconne repealed its secession at noon on July 23.
    I'm not sure who would be the Governor of Winneconne now had it actually seceded from the union...assuming that the minimum age to be elected Governor of Winneconne is 18, probably Ethan Hollenberger?

    Also, I'm guessing that such a state (assuming its boundaries were the same as that of the Village of Winneconne, Wisconsin) would have a fairly solid Republican lean.

    Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

    by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:14:39 PM PST

  •  PPP polling Wisconsin... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone, MichaelNY, JBraden

    Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

    by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:20:14 PM PST

    •  Not surprising (5+ / 0-)

      But I don't think the two will run against each other. :-)

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:51:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ron Johnson will probably run for re-election (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        I don't see him running for President (he probably wouldn't make it out of a GOP primary) or running for WI-6 (Johnson is from Oshkosh in Winnebago County) in the event Petri retires (GOP State Sen. Rick Gudex is Petri's likely successor once he retires). Also, Wisconsin isn't going to elect a carpetbagger to anything, so Hillary isn't going to be RoJo's 2016 WI-Sen election.

        Friend of the Wisconsin Uprising from East Central Illinois! IL-15

        by DownstateDemocrat on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:08:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  clearly. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skibum59, 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. -.4.12, -4.92

          by jncca on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:48:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think he will run. (0+ / 0-)

          He doesn't seem to be very good at it and will have to defend his pretty far right votes rather than running as a blank "businessman" slate like he did in 2010.  In 2016, a Presidential year will very likely mean he'd have to out-perform the top of the ticket by 5-6 points.  

          Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

          by Jacoby Jonze on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:51:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  SD-SEN: Dems looking at Brendan Johnson to (4+ / 0-)

    run if dad retires.

    link

    Very little polling, so I dont know if this is one of those states, where Dems have a better chance of holding the seat if it's open. Rounds will be a tough challenger either way.

    If Tim Johnson does seek re-election, I think Brendan would be a good candidate for US House or Governor.

  •  So a political thought about Ken Jennings... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    uclabruin18, MichaelNY, gabjoh

    He's interested in politics (and is a Mormon Democrat, at that). He's fairly liberal (at least from looking at his blog), he's young, wealthy, probably fairly popular, as charismatic as a trivia nerd can get, and  has ties to both Washington State and Utah. According to Wiki, he was even approached by by Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid to run for Senate in Utah in 2004.

    So why not ask him again to run for something (probably Congress), whether in Utah or Washington State? I mean, Utah would need him more as a candidate (because seriously, we don't have anyone), but he could be an interesting candidate in Washington as well.

    Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

    by Gygaxian on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:47:58 PM PST

  •  For nocturnal people (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stephen Wolf, KingofSpades, gabjoh

    Credit goes to Andrew Shears for the map.
     photo andrewshearsmap_zpsb3f2eafa.png

    I just totally eyeballed this, I didn't look at any official county results.  The only states I'm unsure of are Jefferson, although it looks like it doesn't reach Eugene or Marin County so I'll assume it's red; Washington, can't tell if Columbus and/or Akron are in the state;  Illinois, assuming it's blue because of Obama's overperformance, though it's probably solidly Republican downballot; New Connecticut and Maine, they were probably blue in 2008 since Obama won all but one county in New England, although I'm not sure about 2012.

    Comments:
    Reagan is a swing state.  Bush won Reagan in 2004, Obama won it in '08 and '12... all downballot offices are probably solidly Reaganite though.

    Lincoln (South Texas) is probably Republican based on real results from 2012, though if OFA had contested it and raised Hispanic turnout there's a chance it would have been blue.  It contains the Democratic bastions of Austin, San Antonio, and McAllen - very low turnout in the latter.

    Yazoo looks like it's narrowly Obama.  Probably would have been Republican with lower black turnout.

    Reddest state-Cimmaron, Bluest state-Potomac
    Largest state-Coastal CA, smallest state- Dade or North Slope; lol, two senators for 15-20 million people and two senators for 10-15 thousand people.

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

      Jefferson goes to the Lane County line, but doesn't include it.  Every Oregon county in it leans red.  Some less so like Coos and Jackson, which I guess are probably R+5-7, some more so like Klamath and Lake, which are extremely Republican.

      ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 09:58:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yazoo (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      psychicpanda

      is hard to tell, but it looks like Obama got 49.6-49.8%, McCain 49.5-49.7%, plurality white by total pop, majority by voting age.

      ...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 Feb 21, 2013 at 10:05:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  hypothetically, if one was to give a survey to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    voters in 2012, which dem candidate would have the highest retention rate and which would have the lowest. By that I mean, if one voted for Dukakis in 88 what was their chance that they voted for Obama. If I was to rate all the dem nominees in the postwar period, I would say that LBJ probably has the lowest retention rate and McGovern/Kerry have the highest.

    RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

    by demographicarmageddon on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:33:11 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site