Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Open Tread Banner
Daily Kos Elections is on a modified schedule through the holidays. We'll be back to publishing the Digest regularly in 2014. In the meantime, we'll be posting a daily open thread, and we may post news updates occasionally. Happy holidays!

10:35 AM PT: Babka: With the Virginia recounts finally concluded, we are, at long last, able to announce the winner of our 2013 election prediction contest. So congratulations to BK in the HV, who should email me to collect his prize of delicious, delicious babka. You can also click through to see how you did, and how contest entrants overall fared in their prognostications.

10:43 AM PT: CA-39/40: Goofball.

10:49 AM PT: NJ-02: State Sen. Jeff Van Drew will announce his plans about a possible congressional bid against GOP Rep. Frank LoBiondo "in the next few weeks"—whatever that means—according to his chief of staff. Attorney Bill Hughes, Jr. (the son of ex-Rep. Bill Hughes) is already running, but Van Drew's indecision is forcing local Democratic leaders to wait before making endorsements. However, it seems like they are happy to wait, since a half-dozen county chairs recently penned a joint letter praising Van Drew.

11:02 AM PT: VA-10: Outgoing state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli was mentioned as a possible GOP candidate for retiring Rep. Frank Wolf's seat, but in a new exit interview with the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Cuccinelli reaffirmed that he's "not running for anything for a while."

11:16 AM PT: SeaTac, WA: The ballot measure to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour in the small Washington city of SeaTac narrowly succeeded in November, and then it survived a recount as well. Now, though, it's under attack in the courts, and opponents have won a sizable victory. A judge has agreed that the new law does not apply to workers at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport because it's run by the Port of Seattle rather than SeaTac itself, meaning that the wage increase will only affect a quarter of those it was intended to help. Supporters of the hike are filing an appeal.

11:38 AM PT: MA-06: In a new fundraising email for Iraq vet Seth Moulton, the progressive veterans organization VoteVets labels the man he's hoping to unseat in the Democratic primary, Rep. John Tierney, "a corrupt incumbent." That's an ugly, negative move that plays right into Republican attacks on Tierney, particularly since no one has ever produced a single piece of evidence tying Tierney to the tax evasion scandal that sent his wife to prison for a month back in 2011.

And earlier this fall, the House Ethics Committee declined to open an investigation into Tierney's finances. So I don't understand why VoteVets feels the need to "go there," particularly when there's no there there. (Notably, their ActBlue page leaves off any reference to Tierney.)

VoteVets also refers to Moulton as a "progressive," but that doesn't seem to be how Moulton regards himself; rather, Moulton has called himself "fairly centrist." He also considered running as an independent in 2012 (though he did say he'd caucus as a Democrat).

12:06 PM PT: MT-Sen: The headline here is a bit overblown, but this piece is not a positive one for Lt. Gov. John Walsh, who is running for the Democratic nomination for Montana's open Senate seat. In a 2010 report, the Army's inspector general said that Walsh used his position as adjutant general of the Montana National Guard to pressure subordinates into joining a private lobbying organization called the National Guard Association of the United States (NGAUS), because Walsh was running for vice-chairman of the group. (He was ultimately elected to the post.)

The original report and the article describing it say Walsh engaged in improper activity for "private gain," but Walsh didn't have his hand in the till—it looks like Walsh's aspirations were entirely limited to ascending the leadership ranks at the NGAUS. However, here's an example of an email Walsh sent to further his ambitions:

"I was disappointed to see that you have decided not to support the NGAUS especially after my previous memo outlining the significant contributions of NGAUS over the past several years," Walsh wrote in one such email to subordinates who hadn't joined the group. "I am concerned that as an officer and leader in our organization you do not support my priorities which is to improve the readiness of MTNG which NGAUS clearly does."
I certainly would hate getting an email like this from a superior, and indeed, several officers complained, saying they felt like they were being "bullied" and subject to "coercion." Walsh, in response, is disputing the whole "private gain" notion and argues that the NGAUS helps ensure National Guard readiness through its lobbying efforts.

Will this story matter? It's hard to say. Walsh can argue that he was just looking out for his troops, and if he was kind of a dick in doing so, well, you don't become a National Guard general by being Mr. Nice Guy. We'll soon see how Walsh's opponents react, though. He faces a primary against ex-Lt. Gov. John Bohlinger, while Rep. Steve Daines has the Republican nomination all but locked up.

1:04 PM PT (jeffmd): The Census Bureau is out with new population estimates (measuring the population as of July 1, 2013), which largely show a continuation of the same pattern: population losses in the Northeast and Midwest, counterbalanced with gains in the West and South.

We can cut the data a few different ways to get a sense of the reapportionment picture (which Sean Trende does as well). The following table shows a few different scenarios, depending on how you want to model the growth from here until 2020 (only states with projected changes are shown).

Projected in 2020 Using:
State In 2010 In 2013 10-13 Growth 11-13 Growth 12-13 Growth
California 53 53 54 53 53
Colorado 7 7 8 8 8
Florida 27 27 28 28 28
Illinois 18 18 17 17 17
Michigan 14 14 13 13 13
Minnesota 8 7 7 7 8
Montana 1 1 1 2 2
New York 27 27 27 27 26
North Carolina 13 14 14 14 14
Ohio 16 16 15 15 15
Pennsylvania 18 18 17 17 17
Rhode Island 2 2 1 1 1
Texas 36 36 38 38 38
Virginia 11 11 12 12 12
West Virginia 3 3 2 2 2

If reapportionment were to happen today, only one seat would change hands: Minnesota would lose its 8th seat, while North Carolina would gain a 14th seat. However, if you project forward to 2020, we see a few more changes. In the simplest formulations, we can use the growth rates from 2010 through 2013 to project forward, from 2011 through 2013, or from 2012 through 2013. Regardless of method, we see (largely) the same changes: Texas gains 2 seats; Colorado, North Carolina, and Virginia each gain one seat; and Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia would each lose 1.

There are a few states right on the edge, with different projected numbers of seats based on which model you use: California and Montana may each gain a seat, while New York may lose a seat, and Minnesota may hang onto its 8th seat.

Of course, there's plenty of time left before the next Census and all of this is subject to change, but these early estimates give us a sense of what's to come.

2:40 PM PT: P.S. Despite projections to the contrary, New York still narrowly remains the third-largest state in the nation, but is fewer than 100,000 people ahead of Florida. But given the trends, Florida will surpass New York very soon.

3:27 PM PT (jeffmd): How would reapportionment in 2010 have looked based on the 2003 population projections (using a linear projection of 2000-03 changes to the rest of the decade)?

The answer: slightly different from how it actually turned out. California would have gained two seats, and Michigan and New Jersey would each have kept the seat that they lost. Alabama would have lost a seat, Texas would have gained only 3 seats, and South Carolina and Washington would not have gained the new seat that each did.

This all makes sense, given the demographic changes that occurred in the mid-aughts before the recession. Hurricane Katrina, of course, happened in 2005 shifting the balance between Louisiana and Texas. The Census Bureau knows what it's doing, but unforeseeable events can always throw a wrench into even the best models.

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

  •  Tip Jar (6+ / 0-)

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

    by David Nir on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 06:00:19 AM PST

  •  Election Diary Rescue, weekly edition (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Darth Jeff, eeff

    The EDR team is pleased to announce that we will be bringing EDR back on a weekly basis starting on January 11th. Look for us every Saturday evening. We will start publishing the daily on September first. We have been rescuing and listing down ticket diaries since 2006. Please join us.


    Libertarianism is something that most people grow out of, not unlike, say, hay fever or asthma. Bob Johnson

    by randallt on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 07:31:29 AM PST

  •  Census 2013 national and state data (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GlassCaseMD

    22, Male, NC-02 home, SC-04 School. Majoring in Piano Pedagogy. Not your typical DKE junkie!

    by aggou on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 07:40:06 AM PST

  •  Article on potential 2016 presidential candidates (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, wadingo

    and what they've been up to.

    O'Malley has been quite active. He is definitely running IMO.

    For the GOP side, I think it is interesting that these are the negatives they list for Walker and Christie:

    Christie: The fat factor and man dates with Obama and Bill Clinton.

    Walker: Some things that give him huge appeal with GOP conservatives — taking on unions, most notably — would whip up Democratic critics in general election. Wisconsin near bottom in job creation.

    They ignored Christie's temper and NJ's struggling economy.

    If we nominate O'Malley and Schweitzer against Walker or Christie, it is going to be very easy for us to attack them on their state's struggling economies since O'Malley and Schweitzer have/had strong state economies under their leadership.

    President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

    by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 07:46:34 AM PST

    •  Can't run on state economies so easily (8+ / 0-)

      As the recovery continues, all states likely will improve their economies in the next couple years.

      And there's no telling which states will go up and which go down within the country over a couple years.  We're one country, the states aren't isolated, and state governments have a lot less influence over their own economies than the U.S. Government has over the nation's economy......and we all know the U.S. Government doesn't have as much influence as we sometimes wish.

      Much of what matters today won't matter come fall 2015, when the Presidential campaigns are roaring ahead.

      But you're right that Christie's temperament can matter.

      As far as the article's point on "whipping up Democratic critics," that's pretty silly, every Republican has enough liabilities with our usual voters to let us easily "whip up" our center-left coalition of voters.  Just as every Democrat has enough liabilities with the GOP's usual voters to whip up the GOP's coalition.

      I'm also not keen on Schweitzer being on a national ticket, and I don't think he would be seriously considered, at least not as a finalist.  His erratic behavior in deciding on the MT-Sen race hurts his reputation among insiders, and picking a running mate is an "inside" decision.

      I really think if Hillary runs, it's hers, and I bet O'Malley and other serious wannabes just don't run in the first place.  I don't know that there's such a thing as "running for VP" in a Presidential run.  It's not plausible because you have to run for President just to run for President, or else you look bad, but running for President means dinging Hillary and other rivals.  If you then get the VP nod, you're just lucky.

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

      by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:01:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Who do you think Hillary would be likely to pick (0+ / 0-)

        if she runs and wins the nomination?

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:05:55 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  A bland, white, centrist, governor (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, cville townie

          or ex-governor. Those were all the people she was said to be considering in 2008 (before a late, pathetic offer to give it to Obama when he was winning), it was all about Vilsack, Bayh, and to a lesser extent Warner (all of whom "explored" bids before dropping out very early in the process). Vilsack probably lacks currency now, Bayh may run for something (and his 2010 abandonment of a seat would be a bitter pill for activists to swallow). Warner is still pretty plausible, extremely plausible in fact given that the Macker would be appointing the replacement. Unless Warner wants his old job back come 2017.

          In any event, it will be a Warner type.

          •  Warner is a good candidate (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, cville townie

            but I'd rather he holds his senate seat as long as possible unless Virginia becomes a blue state. Assuming he retires after he turns 70, he'll have served three terms, which would make him the longest serving dem senator from VA since the days of Byrd and Robertson.

            follow me at: http://rumromerebellion.wordpress.com/

            by demographicarmageddon on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:04:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Warner, Beshear, Nixon... (4+ / 0-)

          Purple or Red State Governor would be my guess.  I think she'll go completely centrist with the idea that her Presidency would be so historic that she'll try to appeal to centrist/moderate GOP women and take progressive wing for granted knowing every Repub vote she gets is a +2 net effect and any prog that stays home is just a -1 (ie won't vote for GOP).  

          Glenn Greenwald promotes far-right fringe extremist group The Oath Keepers - https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/statuses/377787818619064320

          by Jacoby Jonze on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 11:33:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

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

            is rather old for it, isn't he? And Nixon is still uncommitted on SSM, though I suspect he'd be for it if he were shortlisted. Otherwise it would be a thumb in the eye of LGBT orgs.

            •  It would be a pretty old ticket... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              But I don't think Clinton would worry about setting up her VP to run in eight years or anything like that.  Also given Clinton's age and recent health issues, she'll be pressured to have  a "ready on day one" type of VP and thus can't go for a younger VP who might not be seen as ripe for the top job.  

              Glenn Greenwald promotes far-right fringe extremist group The Oath Keepers - https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/statuses/377787818619064320

              by Jacoby Jonze on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 12:08:23 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think that gets it backward (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                Clinton would tie Reagan as the oldest president in history. It was a liability for him, but would be less so for HRC. For one thing, women have a better life expectancy. Also, treatment for aging has made a stride or two since then. But still, it's hard to imagine Clinton addressing this issue by picking someone significantly older than herself. Beshear is 69 now. Also, the VP slot is where the candidate typically showcases a rising star that could one day succeed them, that ain't Beshear. Though a cabinet berth for him could be a good thing indeed.

            •  Nixon is pro-SSM (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, Skaje, wadingo

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

              by sapelcovits on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:05:28 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Another bad prediction on your part (0+ / 1-)
            Recommended by:
            Hidden by:
            Setsuna Mudo

            You have previously predicted that Larry Summers would be shoved down the throats of progressives, and that progressives would be forced to accept a grand bargain.  0 for 2 there, and you can also toss in filibuster reform as well.

            It's obvious that you are a Third Way Democrats and don't like the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, but they are growing and are flexing their muscles.  The last 6 months have demonstrated that quite clearly.  The progressives forced Larry Summers to withdraw and forced Obama to abandon the grand bargain, and pushed filibuster reform.  

            "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

            by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:34:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I really think that's impossible to guess (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JDJase, MichaelNY, wadingo, abgin

          Guessing who would be a hand-picked running mate 3 years from now really just impossible.

          The names people throw out aren't any more likely than a lot of names of people no one here would think of.  The only thing one can say is just about any current or recent Senator or Governor who isn't damaged goods or in the obvious twilight of his/her career is a realistic possibility.  And those aren't necessarily the only realistic possibilities...but certainly they are the obvious ones.

          I would guess someone like Hillary wouldn't want a first-term Governor or recently-elected Senator who didn't previously serve in statewide office.  Cory Booker would be about as green as she might get in a choice.

          I bet she'd pick a man...a two-woman ticket isn't something I think she'd risk.

          But I wouldn't rule out a non-white running mate because the Obama Presidency has made that a non-issue.  Of course non-white options are very limited.

          I wouldn't assume she'd pick someone from a purple battleground state.  I bet that would be a minor factor or non-factor, because we're in an era where it rarely helps or matters.

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

          by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 12:50:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm wondering if she'd want to pick a Hispanic (0+ / 0-)

            And would that be a first on a major-party ticket?

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 01:26:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  My exact thinking (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              A Hispanic would round out her ticket very nicely and would be a great capstone to showing that the Democrats are the party of diversity.  Julian Castro is way too young and a big-city mayor seems like a stupid choice.  And none of the Hispanics in Congress seem to have much gravitas.  But like DCCyclone said, this is a decision that won't be made for another 2.5 years.  Plenty of time for someone to build up the reputation needed.

              And I don't think there has ever been a Hispanic on the ticket.

            •  She probably would (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              but there aren't any obvious candidates around.  Unfortunately Obama hasn't appointed any Hispanics to high-level Cabinet positions (otherwise that could be a place for selection).

              "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

              by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:41:25 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Except for Hilda Solis who was labor secretary (5+ / 0-)

                for Obama's first 4 years and Thomas Perez who is the current labor secretary.

                And he tried to appoint Bill Richardson, not that would matter because Richardson is "dead" to the Clintons for helping Obama in 2008 primaries.

                President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

                by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:49:12 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Labor is not considered a major cabinet position (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  and Solis and Perez are too much to the left to be considered for VP.  If the Ds were to somehow (not gonna happen) to nominate a hard core conservaDem like Evan Bayh, then one of them may be needed to get some semblance of base turnout.  (No Hillary is not a conservaDem and won't have problems with base turnout unless she goes out of her way to alienate progressives).

                  "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

                  by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:53:36 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  I agree that being from a battleground state (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            is less important in these years. The people from these states is voting less influenced by it. I think it is more likely she finds some geographical ballance and some appeal to the minorities.

            I think that she will run at least a little to the left than her bid in 2008. She needs to run like an average Democrat of today. This is the most important detail for me.

            B Obama has done a very good job attracting the most important political figures to the key positions of his cabinet (J Biden, H Clinton, J Kerry). I think it would be good for her if she continues by this way.

            I see not a trouble with two women in the ticket, if there are the right persons. I think it should not be a difference. I see someone succesful from Colorado, A Klobuchar and M Cantwell in a good position for it. And there are women in this list. I also see M Warner, J Markell and A Cuomo with decent options but they have a worse geographical ballance with H Clinton. I think that M O'Malley can become senator after 2016.

        •  Someone who doesn't alienate (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          anyone in the party.  That would exclude both strong progressives as well as strong anti-progressive Third Way types.  

          "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

          by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:35:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I think Gov. O'Malley is posturing... (6+ / 0-)

        To be as close to frontrunner status (right now, he's a long way off) as possible if Hillary Clinton and Vice President Biden don't run -- and to show he'd be an energetic, well-rounded veep choice if Clinton does run.

        I think Schweitzer, the honey badger of Democratic politics, won't make his 2016 decision based on what Clinton does.

        Pragmatic progressive. Oregonian, Cascadian, and American. Keeper of the DKE glossary.

        by SaoMagnifico on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:43:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I bet O'Malley wouldn't defer to Biden (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, wadingo, demreplib33

          Biden isn't strong enough to scare away everyone, and I bet O'Malley would challenge him, as would some other higher-profile ambitious Democrats.

          As far as Schweitzer is concerned, if Hillary runs, he's a nothingburger, and I think the same if Biden runs.  I think Schweitzer likely would prove damn weak.  He would get some buzz if both Hillary and Biden pass, but I can't imagine that happening, I think it's close to 100% that one of them runs...and that whichever one does so will be the nominee.

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

          by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 12:53:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  All very realistic negatives (8+ / 0-)

      I've said before that Walker's union antics would tank him in Ohio, which is a big union state and an almost must win for Republicans. Issue 2 went down badly, which is an indicator that anti-union in Ohio is a non-starter.

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

      by DrPhillips on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:16:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Cant see O'Malley running if Clinton does (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      But it looks like Schweitzer will run if Hillary does run. Still think Hillary would win, but it would be an interesting primary.

      Christie's temper and NJ economy will be a factor, but his weight wont be.

      •  I don't see how Schweitzer would gain (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wadingo, MichaelNY

        any traction. He isn't anywhere near the stature of President Obama and Clinton with each passing day solidifies her hold on the primary electorate. Her support grows with each poll, even with her general election numbers slipping.

      •  I think O'Malley runs regardless. He's got a (0+ / 0-)

        solid fundraising base separate from Hillary and he is the only candidate of the bunch who can run to Hillary's left. No reason for him not to run. He'll be termed out of office and there is nowhere for him to go in MD politics.

        President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

        by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 10:12:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You don't think Mikulski would retire in 2016? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Cardin will be 75 in 2018, also, too.

          (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

          by TrueBlueDem on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 10:22:34 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  He was a very early supporter of Clinton (7+ / 0-)

          in 2008, so I cant see him running against her now.

          I actually think he would be happy being a VP. It would set him up better to be the nominee in the next open election.  

          •  I don't think that will be a factor at all in his (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, wadingo, demreplib33

            decision. He doesn't stand a chance at getting picked for VP unless he runs IMO. He is also from the East Coast and relatively unknown. He is also very liberal and I can't see Hillary picking someone like him as a running mate unless he runs against her and has a decent showing.  She is more likely to pick Bayh or Warner who are very middle of the road and unlikely to excite the base in any way.

            President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

            by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 11:10:10 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think even Hillary will move away (8+ / 0-)

              from the CW/Third Wayism of a bland, centrist, offend-no-one running mate. Obama has well proven the effectiveness of a national base election. It takes more work and more resources than Democrats were traditionally used to putting up, but is a much more reliable path to victory as 2012 proved.

              (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

              by TrueBlueDem on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 01:16:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  This is one reason why Obama's approval (5+ / 0-)

                will matter.

                I think Hillary will move to the left(vs the Third Way) anyway, but if Obama's approval remains low or falls, then I think the Third Way wing will say it's because Obama was too liberal. Whether that would influence Hillary, I dont know.

                •  The Third Way can say whatever nonsense (4+ / 0-)

                  they want, but the D electorate has largely rejected their agenda.  Two things have changed in the last 10 years, one is that rank and file Ds have moved to the left (more non-whites, youth, urbanites, and secularists.), and two, the Ds no longer are afraid of the big bad Republicans and no longer need to pander to cultural conservatives.  Ten years ago, the Ds were terrified of Karl Rove. No more.  Evangelicals came out in larger numbers and voted larger for Mitt Romney in 2012 than they did for one of their own in 2004.  He still lost by 5 million votes with an unemployment rate at 8%.

                  Obama took basically no clear centrist positions in 2012, made no appeal to white middle America except economic populism, and aggressively attacked the Rs on cultural issues.  Compare that with Bill Clinton's 1996 reelection campaign where he signed welfare reform and went on Christian radio to tout his signature on DOMA.
                  A lower approval rating isn't going to change that conclusion.

                  Both of these trends are very bad for the Third Way, because for the DLC/Third Way to thrive, they need the D electorate to either be centrist or be afraid enough of the Rs that they are willing to accept a centrist agenda.  The D electorate no longer is willing to do either.  

                  "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

                  by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:27:21 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  so i assume you want a lot of the fundraising (0+ / 0-)

                    donors and areas like Scarsdale to defect to the GOP?

                    follow me at: http://rumromerebellion.wordpress.com/

                    by demographicarmageddon on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:07:44 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not worried about that too much (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY, gabjoh, wadingo

                      The GOP retrograde views on social and racial issues will prevent that from happening for now.  If and when the GOP drops their racist, sexist, homophobic agenda (and they will have to in order to win elections in the future), then I'll be a little more worried.

                      "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

                      by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:12:33 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I agree with you on this (3+ / 0-)

                        I don't think Scarsdale is going to vote for Senators Cruz or Paul any time soon.

                        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                        by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:16:12 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  well Paul and Cruz seem like someone (0+ / 0-)

                          who could even lose some normally republican territory. With someone like Christie, he could do very well in silk stocking territory. I could see him winning places like Fairfield County.

                          follow me at: http://rumromerebellion.wordpress.com/

                          by demographicarmageddon on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 05:50:59 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I doubt he could (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            MichaelNY, wadingo

                            Christie will either have to take retrograde positions on cultural issues in the GOP primary process, or he will lose the primary.  Those positions he takes will guarantee a loss in a place like Fairfield County.  

                            If Christie wins the general election (which he could), it will be because (a) Obama's second term was a total disaster, (b) Christie does unusually well among working class white voters (including union ones), or (c) D base doesn't turn out in large enough numbers.  Christie won't be able to retain his moderate image on cultural issues through the R primary.

                            The GOP is at least 2 election cycles from shedding their racism, sexism, and homophobia and taking a centrist position on cultural issues.  Which they'll have to do in order to comeback whenever the D screw up next (it was 1952 for the New Deal Ds and 1992 for the Reagan conservative Rs.)

                            "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

                            by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 06:33:41 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Fairfield County isn't voting (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            MichaelNY, itskevin, wadingo

                            for any Republican presidential candidate anytime soon.

                            First of all, Romney was a perfect match for the economically-conservative suburbanites there, and he outperformed McCain hugely there. He still didn't get close to winning the county.

                            The main reason for that is, the cities (especially Bridgeport) have gotten much more Democratic. Bridgeport voted 70% for Kerry, then 83% for Obama in 2008, and then 86% for Obama in 2012. Stamford has also voted about 63% for Obama both times. With Dems getting those kind of margins in the two largest cities, Republicans would need to do insanely well everywhere else in the county in order to win it, and the county is not entirely rich (the Danbury area is more middle-class, and didn't swing as much toward Romney as the Gold Coast did).

                            Moral of the story, it would take massive margins (larger than Romney's) in the Gold Coast, along with low turnout in Bridgeport, for the Republicans to get anywhere close to winning Fairfield County. And in a Presidential election, that's just not going to happen.

                            (-8.38, -4.72), CT-02 (home), ME-01 (college) "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." -Spock

                            by ProudNewEnglander on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 07:27:33 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I will admit of using an area as a proxy (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            MichaelNY

                            for something else (Fairfield = rich vote). But oftentimes it involves not controlling for something else. Kind of like the example of why some suburban areas swung dem in the 90s and 00s.

                            Was it because the people were changing their minds or because suburbia itself was changing?

                            follow me at: http://rumromerebellion.wordpress.com/

                            by demographicarmageddon on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:45:34 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Yes, and immediately, please. (0+ / 0-)

                      My apologies to Howard Dean, but I'd much rather have the guys in pickup truck with Confederate flags in my party than them.

                      "Pillows, but no sleep / Feathers, but no birds." | Pro-transit young black urban progressive | SSP/DKE | -9, -7.79 | NJ-05 - ! | Yard signs don't vote.

                      by gabjoh on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 12:25:55 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

            •  I don't think Hillary will pick Bayh or Warner (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              They are so unacceptable to the D base that they would reduce base turnout to the point where Hillary would put her election at jeopardy.

              Unlike in the 1990s, the Ds win today when they turnout their base.  

              "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

              by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:29:33 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hillary's entire 2008 campaign was run like it was (3+ / 0-)

                1996. I am not sure she grasps today's political environment at all and I expect to pick some tired, moderate like Bayh for VP.

                President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

                by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:51:17 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Which is why she lost in 2008 (4+ / 0-)

                  I think she's smart enough to get that through her head.  And I'm sure that the Obama campaign operatives who will be part of her campaign will make that pretty clear.

                  But if you are right and she runs a 1996-style campaign, she'll lose.  Perhaps even in a primary.

                  "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

                  by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:56:44 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I remember in Game Change (book) (4+ / 0-)

                    there was a great passage about how pissed she was Obama is selling all sorts of stuff with his face on it and she demanded she have that, too.  Her aides were like, uh, who will buy this?  The people buying Obama's stuff are college kids while she played down being a woman, which was the exciting part about her candidacy.

                    Her current posturing shows she won't make that mistake again and she is full-on going, "I am woman, hear me break the glass ceiling."  She may not end up with a college following like that of Obama's, but she'll have the gays, and I'll be one of the first to get a tshirt.  I'm even considering making a "Hillary Jar" to put extra money in all next year so I can donate a couple hundred the day she announces.  She'll have the excitement this time me thinks.  

                    Oh, and then there are women who might be excited.  ;)  It's about fucking time!

                    •  I never thought she downplayed the woman angle (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY

                      but it didn't matter she doesn't inspire people in the same way Obama does. She'll never get by on small dollar donations. She is just not that kind of candidate.

                      President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

                      by askew on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 08:23:53 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

    •  Walker has a bigger problem (0+ / 0-)

      His lack of a college degree.  

      This will hurt him in both the primary and general election with the suggestion that he is too dumb to be President.  So any Rick Perry like incidents by Walker would probably be magnified.

      "The Republican Party is at a crossroads. It must decide whether it wants to be the party of Lincoln or the party of apartheid." -Ted Kennedy The teabaggers have chosen to be the party of racism and apartheid.

      by TeaBaggersAreRacists on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:37:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Working on a unicameral house diary series. (9+ / 0-)

    535 seats, which means to seats added to each state House delegation. I'm starting out mapping smaller states and will go by region to organize the diaries.

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

    by DrPhillips on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:19:01 AM PST

  •  Medicaid expansion/elections (0+ / 0-)

    I live on the Indiana side of the Ohio River, where Gov. Pence has declined the Medicaid expansion, while Kentucky has one of the most successful ACA rollout and has taken the Medicaid money. Has anyone seen any reports of people in border areas moving to a Medicaid expansion state from a decline state? I would think that this could have an impact on elections in the state where people are directly benefiting by virtue of moving, and should be strong Dem voters.

    "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 Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:42:39 AM PST

    •  Well, the coverage hasn't even started yet (10+ / 0-)

      The full-scale ACA implementation is still very new and is not well understood by the average person. It will take a while for people who aren't plugged-in to recognize the new reality and do the math for themselves.

      In addition, a lot of poor people don't have the luxury of moving. If they have a job where they currently live and have finally worked through the process of getting set up with housing assistance, heating assistance, etc., disturbing the apple cart to start anew is a very difficult decision to make.

      Within a few years, once the billions start flowing, we'll be up to 40 or more states with expanded Medicaid, so these great migrations are pretty unlikely.

      (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

      by TrueBlueDem on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 09:16:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Artur Davis (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, demreplib33, JBraden

    I think it's hilarious that he's such a star with the Virginia GOP establishment (or at least thinks himself so).  What has he done that someone like Parker Griffith hasn't?  If Bobby Bright or Gene Taylor switches parties, will they be invited to speak at the 2016 GOP national convention?

  •  NE-3: Adrian Smith may get primary challenge (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, demreplib33

    from Tom Brewer, an Afghanistan veteran and military man for 36 years.

    http://journalstar.com/...

    One of the reddest districts in the country so the primary is where all the action is at.  Smith won the 2006 open seat primary with 39% against 4 other candidates, and only won the general election 55-45 over Democrat Scott Kleeb, but has since won reelection with 70-77% of the vote (though that's less than the 85-87% Smith's predecessor Tom Osborne always won).

    The last time Democrats were competitive here was in 1990, when Republican Bill Barrett beat Democrat Sandra Scofield by just 4,000 votes.

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

    by JDJase on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 12:47:44 PM PST

  •  MT-Sen news is disturbing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    The subordinate pressuring could become a scandal if more is revealed. Certainly Daines could use it against him.

    Thinking the Dems in MT should start seriously considering Bohlinger instead. Walsh isn't exactly vetted, he's not connected to Schweitzer like Bohlinger is, he doesn't have nearly as much political experience, and he doesn't have the bipartisan cred that Bohlinger does.

    •  Could Bullock (0+ / 0-)

      appoint himself? That could solve some problems. Maybe an appointment would make Schweitzer reconsider?

    •  Yeah, it sounds bad (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen

      and a good reason to vote for the other guy. However, I'm troubled by what a loose cannon and extreme-sounding guy Bohlinger is. Between the two Democratic candidates, Daines is looking like a stronger bet to win. Of course, there's no telling whether the voting public will actually care about this, but I really don't like that he abused his position this way.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:30:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're referring to his Tea Party comment? (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, demreplib33, JBraden, wadingo

        I dunno, I think that kind of thing could resonate in Montana. It's a folksy, tell-it-straight state without much of a Tea Party contingent. It's why Schweitzer was, and is, so popular.

        I agree that Daines looks pretty solid right now, but this is before the campaign begins. His recent votes are bound to have made him more vulnerable than he appears now.

    •  Bohlinger is not credible. (6+ / 0-)

      ...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 Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:47:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  At this point, (4+ / 0-)

      I'd prefer if Schweitzer reconsidered.  He was really our only realistic hope of beating Daines in the first place, and if he were appointed to the remainder of Baucus's term, it would help.

      And no, he has no chance of being the next POTUS, and little shot at becoming veep.

      Proud progressive stuck in George J. "Mike" Kelly's PA-3 (where birth control is tantamount to Pearl Harbor).

      by JBraden on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:52:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed, mostly (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        demreplib33

        Though I take two exceptions to your post.

        First: Hillary isn't a sure bet. She may or may not run; that hasn't been decided yet. She may or may not die in the interim; politicians die old, true, but sometimes they die a little younger than normal. There's no telling. And if she does run, she may or may not win the nomination. If Schweitzer runs, I'm telling you right now, I'm casting my primary vote for him, as will quite a lot of other people - polls be damned.

        And second: If Hillary does win the nomination, Schweitzer is likely to be the VPOTUS. He shores up credibility with the left populist base, which is Hillary's main weakness, and simultaneously shores up her appeal to rural communities and whites, which is her main strength. He's a very attractive candidate, unlike O'Malley and Cuomo (incredibly bland), and Jerry Brown and Steve Beshear (far too old, but admittedly awesomesauce).

        Still, Schweitzer would bury Daines, and he might as well be doing something between now and 2016. Leading a mining corporation isn't exactly going to endear him to the environmentalists on the left, who still make up a sizable portion of our primary contingent. Saving our ass in MT-Sen would make a lot of people grateful.

  •  MT-SEN: If there was no financial gain (8+ / 0-)

    involved, then I dont know if this will be a big deal.

    The "No Mr Nice Guy" thing might work. And if there isnt more to the story, Daines might be careful in using it because it allows Walsh to talk about his military career. But definitely a story to watch.

  •  Massachusetts Legislature Specials (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    James Allen, Gygaxian, Darth Jeff

    The Secretary of the Commonwealth has posted dates for special elections for Boston Mayor-elect Marty Walsh's seat (13th Suffolk), State Senators Don Humason's old seat (4th Hampden) and US Rep Kathering Clark's old Fifth Middlesex senate seat.

    All three races have a March 4th primary and an April 1st general.

    I've got nothing on Clark's seat.  

    But a bit of shameless self-promotion of my own on Humason's seat, which consists only of the City of Westfield about 10 miles away from Springfield in Hampden County.  So far a vet and local lawyer and a councilor-elect (like he just got elected) have filed with the state for that race.

    The Globe has the latest on Walsh's old seat.  An employee of the Dept of Conservation & Recreation and a Boston cop are eyeing the race.

    And hey, while I'm promoting myself, got some potential candidates that may challenge the Republican State Senator Humason in the Second Hampden & Hampshire Senate district in next year's general.

    "How do you have patience for people who claim they love America, but clearly can't stand Americans"-Annette Benning as Sydney Ellen Wade in the American President

    by Mski011 on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 02:38:28 PM PST

    •  Interesting (0+ / 0-)

      but i would like to know more details. Especially - on Republican-leaning Humason's seat: who are candidates, which parties, their general ideological positions (in both parties) and so on. Then it will be possible to root for somebody's or evaluate somebody's chances.

  •  Thoughts on Hillary's VP (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    We are all assuming a lot, but, that being said, whoever she selects has to balance out the ticket in some way, whether it is geography, conservadem vs. liberal, white vs minority or whatever.  She also won't want someone that would upstage her, not that any candidate does.  She would want someone who is quiet and hard working.  Certainly bringing on Beshear, who showed that a state can extend medical coverage to most of its citizens, would be something that she would want to run on.  This would also put Kentucky in place in the electoral college.  While Kentucky doesn't have a lot of electoral votes, 8 is a decent number and the GOP certainly needs states like Kentucky in its column.  Also, Clinton/Beshear could also put other neighboring states in the mix, which would also give the GOP a higher hill to climb.  Finally, Rand Paul is up for reelection in 2016, so this could make him work a lot harder for his reelection.  Of course if he is on the national ticket, that would make Kentucky even more interesting.  

    Having Nixon from Missouri, with its 11 electoral votes is also interesting.  Missouri has historically been a bellwhether state.  GOP Sen. Blunt is also up for reelection in 2016, so Clinton/Nixon would make his work harder.  Senate candidates from Missouri from either party don't usually get reelected by huge margins anyway.  The GOP usually counts on Missouri being in its column.

    Finally, Hillary might go for a Latino/Latino candidate.  With growing numbers of Latinos in many states, including many southern states, this could really put a lot of states in play and would certainly add a lot of excitement into the election.  

    •  I disagree on this (9+ / 0-)
      This would also put Kentucky in place in the electoral college.
      People vote for President, not Vice-President. If Missouri is very close, anyway, having Nixon on the ticket just might help tip it to the Democrats, but Kentucky is an R+13 state, so I really doubt they'd vote Democratic for President just because their really popular Democratic governor is on the ticket. If he were running for President himself, that would be a different story (though remember that Al Gore lost Tennessee in 2000, under admittedly quite different circumstances, as he hadn't been a statewide official there for quite a while by then).

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 03:03:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  If she ticket balances, it should be on age (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      instead of geography. Just like Obama went with an older, more experienced politician to reassure voters, I expect Hillary to go with a younger politician to reassure voters since she'll be 69 in 2016. That leaves out Beshear who will be 72 in 2016.

      The GOP is likely to have a young ticket with some combo of Christie, Cruz, Rubio, Walker, Paul, Ayotte (as possible VP pick). If Hillary picks an old, boring white guy, that would create an unfortunate contrast IMO.

      Younger VP choices for Clinton:
      Martin O'Malley - (53 in 2016)
      Martin Heinrich - (45 in 2016)
      Corey Booker - (47 in 2016)
      Michael Bennet (52 in 2016)
      Chris Murphy (43 in 2016)

      But, I still think she is going to make a bad decision and pick Bayh or Warner.

      President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

      by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:45:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Julian Castro (42 in 2016) (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, askew, wadingo

        Youngest, minority, executive, DNC protege.

        Booker is interesting now that he's a senator, but Castro provides more regional balance and Hispanics are going to want to be locked down in 2016 as Dems. Would make 3 cycles voting strong D and should get the demographic to AA levels of loyalty.

        Julian Castro is the front runner, IMO. Clinton would have picked a moderate like Bayh or Warner in 2008, but losing changes your mind and seeing Obama win as an out liberal I believe has changed her calculus.

        SSP alumni, 28, Male, Democrat, TX-14 Elections Blogger for Burnt Orange Report. Collection of Texas elections diaries can be found here

        by trowaman on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 07:43:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I can't see someone getting elevated from Mayor (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, Possible Liberal, wadingo

          to VP. That seems like too big of a leap. Has that ever happened before?

          I have yet to see that Hillary learns from mistakes. We'll see I guess.

          President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

          by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:38:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The test (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, Stephen Wolf, gabjoh, wadingo

            Does she give Mark Penn anything beyond a ceremonial role in a 2015/16 campaign?

            If he's influencing the campaign, no learning.

            SSP alumni, 28, Male, Democrat, TX-14 Elections Blogger for Burnt Orange Report. Collection of Texas elections diaries can be found here

            by trowaman on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 08:56:25 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It wasn't just Penn who was a disaster in that (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, wadingo

              campaign. Ickes, Solis Doyle, etc. were all incompetent. It was the fact that Hillary refused to put 1 person in charge and most of the Hillary crowd hates one another and was fighting with the Bill crowd to control the campaign. It was incredibly disorganized from top to bottom.

              President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

              by askew on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 09:30:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  On Mayors (7+ / 0-)

            Cities are larger than they have been by size and percentage of people living in them; they are centers of population. A mayor is still not as impressive as a Governor in title, but the Mayor of San Antonio oversees more constituents than a senator from Delaware or Governor of Montana.

            We're an urban country now. It's a brave new world. Demographics are the game now and a Hispanic Mayor from a Hispanic plurality city that is beginning to experience a tech boom would make a statement.

            SSP alumni, 28, Male, Democrat, TX-14 Elections Blogger for Burnt Orange Report. Collection of Texas elections diaries can be found here

            by trowaman on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 09:00:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Giuliani 2008 (4+ / 0-)

            9/11 does make Giuliani a completely unique example, but he was viewed as a viable presidential candidate for some time, despite being a mayor.

            After all, Hillary's political career has hardly been one to follow precedents: First lady, who was then elected to the Senate, and ran to be the first female President of the US. Ignoring the issue of whether choosing a mayor for VP is precedented or not, Castro's not a half-bad candidate:

            -Executive experience.
            -Constituency of 2.3 million (more than the 15 least populated states).
            -Young.
            -Hispanic.
            -Dynamic with star power.
            -Well educated.
            -(Texan-2020, 2024?)

            •  He's more than half bad (0+ / 0-)

              In fact he's terrible.
              He doesn't really have executive experience. He's a weak mayor. In cities with a weak mayor system, a City manager and the City council really wield the power. The mayor is more of a ceremonial post.
              Well educated: Ok, but EVERYONE from both parties who runs for president is that. Certainly not more well educated that Clinton, Biden, Warren or anyone else who might run.
              Youth: Yes he's that but with his thin resume, it's probably more of a hindereance than an assett.
              Constituency: See the weak mayor system.

              He's not ready yet. Let him win a statewide race in Texas first or Get some real experience in the Cabinent of the next Democratic president.

          •  I think she has (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            As I mentioned above, just about everything she has done post-SoS has focused on women's issues and talking about glass ceilings.  She finally figured out what makes her exciting!

            •  She's not exciting. She's giving speeches to Wall (0+ / 0-)

              Street for cash right now. I am sure those attendees are going WILD with enthusiasm for her.

              President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

              by askew on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 08:25:06 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Be better to have both Beshear and Nixon (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, Stephen Wolf, demreplib33

      run for Senate

  •  PA-St-Sen (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, itskevin, eeff

    Sen. Bob Robbins (R, 50th) to retire this year at end of term. Pretty sure it's relatively safe R -- he was unopposed in 2010.

    •  I live in Robbins's district (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Adam B, MichaelNY, jj32, eeff

      It's probably safe R, but he's an entrenched incumbent.  Will be fun to see how an open-seat race shakes out.

      Proud progressive stuck in George J. "Mike" Kelly's PA-3 (where birth control is tantamount to Pearl Harbor).

      by JBraden on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 04:47:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's not completely safe. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Adam B

      Democrats came within 8% of beating him as incumbent in 2006, when the district was slightly more conservative. I think Romney won it by 10% in 2012, which isn't great. But it's possible to win that kind of district in the west. I think it starts as likely Republican until we can see who the Democratic candidate will be.

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

      by redrelic17 on Thu Jan 02, 2014 at 07:35:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  AR-LG: Ethics committee imposes $11K fine (8+ / 0-)

    on Darr. This is the highest aggregate amount ever imposed in one case by the Arkansas Ethics Commission. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, a conservative newspaper has called on Darr to resign or if he decides not to, to be impeached.  

    Democrat Paul Bookout resigned (earlier this year) three days after the Ethics Committee fined him $8,000. But Republicans have been refusing to call for Darr's ouster. As Mike Cook at Talk Business says, what Darr has done is far worse. Bookout used campaign money for personal purpose. Darr used campaign money and taxpayer money for personal use.

    Larry Jegley, the Prosecuting Attorney in Little Rock, is now considering whether to form a grand jury and proceed with criminal indictments against Mark Darr. (Darr has already admitted to violating 11 laws.)

    http://talkbusiness.net/...

    http://talkbusiness.net/...

    •  The size of the fines (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Seems kind of "low" in absolute terms, though I appreciate that they are very large for AR, and that what Darr did is exceptionally scummy.

      Has anyone written a good overview piece of the entire scandal?

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

      by David Nir on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 08:20:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm letting everybody right now (0+ / 0-)

    I am a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter and if I see anything that I find that is even the slightest disrespectful to her, I'm calling them out on it.

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

    by BKGyptian89 on Mon Dec 30, 2013 at 07:14:32 PM PST

  •  Census (4+ / 0-)

    As a kind of layman Census nerd, I always get excited about these releases.  Not surprised by the numbers.  Much hay was made before these numbers coming out about Florida all but surpassing New York.  Well, knowing the Census's estimates over the past few days, I was also not surprised to see New York hold onto it's spot however thin, and Michigan hold off North Carolina for another year.  

    For a reason I still have been able to glean, and from looking at the Census estimates from 2000 to 2010, the bureau seems to regularly overestimate the population of central cities in the South (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, etc...were found to have been greatly overestimated when the 2010 Census numbers came out).  I think it's because their formula seems to overweigh housing unit construction, and just assume low vacancies.  It's not really there fault as it's probably easier to get those numbers than physical household moves calculated by the IRS, but it also leaves the estimates more tenuous than in years past.  2008 really turned things upside down where usual trends could still be generally trusted, but stuff at the micro-level got really hard (i.e. the strange trend where the down economy kept people at home in some states, but actually allowed/incentivized some people to move in others).

    It looks like New York and Michigan hold off a place change for another year.  After Michigan gets passed up next year, it looks to be a few more decades before anyone would catch up, and that was when the population of the state was falling.  Though, this is our second year of growth, and it remains anemic, it is revving up.  The numbers mean that less people are moving out, and that net births and immigration are once again allow for a net population gain.  This also means that Detroit proper's population loss continues to slow, and that the modest gains for the metro will increase when the county numbers come out in March, I believe.  

    I hate that politically I already see people attributing the growth to Snyder, whereas the truth is that population was a lagging indicator, and that along with the bring down of the unemployment that population also finally bottomed out in Granholm's last year.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site