Just as states with progressive lawmakers and activists have themselves initiated innovative programs over a wide range of issues, state-based progressive blogs have helped provide us with a point of view, inside information and often an edgy voice that we just don't get from the traditional media. This week in progressive state blogs is designed specifically to focus attention on the writing and analysis of people focused on their home turf. Let me know via comments or Kosmail if you have a favorite state- or city-based blog you think I should be watching.
Inclusion of a diary does not necessarily indicate my agreement or endorsement of its contents.
At Blue Oregon, Kari Chisholm writes—A bloodbath. But not in Oregon!
Oregon once again proved that things look different here.
Senator Jeff Merkley's resounding victory was huge, but was by no means a certainty. In the years to come, some will chalk up his victory as a "gimme"—but it was hardly that. Everyone on Team Merkley—including hundreds and hundreds of volunteers—worked very, very hard to make it look that easy. Amazingly, his margin of victory was larger than that of Cory Booker, Dick Durbin, Chris Coons, Tom Udall—and none of them faced millions in attack ads from the Koch Brothers.
Our entire congressional delegation was easily re-elected, including Rep. Peter DeFazio who faced a $675,000 superpac onslaught in the last week of his race.
As Senate President Peter Courtney said last night, Oregonians chose the Democrats to govern again in Salem. They returned John Kitzhaber for an historic fourth term—and by a bigger margin than 2010. Our Senate majority is now up to at least 17, with Senator-elect Sara Gelser on her way. [...]
The top-two primary, Measure 90, wasn't even close—with 68% of voters rejecting it. The story that will reverberate for months to come is the legalization of marijuana—as Oregonians voted 56 to 44 to be the third state to make the leap.
At
Blue Virginia,
lowkell writes—
Are Broadcast TV Political Ads a Huge Waste of Money? VA-10 as a Case Study:
I've said for years that broadcast TV advertising, particularly in places like the expensive and fragmented DC Metro market, provide an extremely low "bang for the buck"/"return on investment" to Congressional candidates. Now we have some new numbers which illustrate my point: "More than $111 million has been spent on broadcast television ads for U.S. House candidates since Labor Day, but more than $80 million of that went to ads airing outside the candidates' districts, according to data by Targeted Victory" (see Targeted Victory's analysis here). Yep, $80 million out of $111 million outright wasted. That's a pathetically low "bang for the buck" by almost any metric. But wait, it gets worse!
Eighty million dollars is a staggering figure. On average, just $0.22 reaches a voters in one of these districts. Take Virginia's 10th CD for instance. If you run broadcast TV ads in the DC Metro market, it costs a fortune, but what percentage reach: a) areas outside the 10th CD; b) people in the 10th CD who aren't likely voters? As for part a of this question, that's easy. See this Designated Market Map for the DC area: in short, your broadcast TV ad will reach the eastern panhandle of West Virginia (not in the 10th CD), large swaths of Maryland (not in the 10th CD), DC (not in the 10th CD), Arlington (ditto), Alexandria (ditto), Fairfax County (mostly ditto), Prince William County (ditto), Stafford/Spotsylvania/etc. (ditto). All that money is TOTALLY WASTED. In the end, perhaps 1/7th (14%) or so of market reached by a broadcast TV ad in the DC Metro market reaches the 10th CD. That means 86% of a DC Metro market broadcast TV ad buy is essentially "bleed"—not reaching the targeted audience at all, ergo wasted.
More to come after the orange gerrymander.
At CalBuzz, Jerry Roberts and Phil Trounstine write—Election Post-Mortem: We’ve Seen This Movie Before:
California remains true blue: While Republicans across the nation crowed and claimed an alleged “mandate,” California Democrats once more triumphed by sweeping all eight constitutional offices, starting with Jerry Brown’s capture of an unprecedented fourth term as governor, as they stopped the GOP wave at the Sierra. In the most favorable political atmosphere imaginable—a very small and very conservative turnout of voters bristling with rage against the other party’s president—Republicans won a few extra House and legislative seats, but still haven’t won a statewide post since 2006, an impressive streak of political failure.
Former Sen. Jim Brulte visits the Capitol Bureau.But Mr. Beef won some bragging rights: Jim Brulte, the big, burly boss of California Republicans, denied Democrats a two-thirds majority in the state Senate by winning two toss-up seats in Orange County and the Central Valley, and has a chance of doing the same for the Assembly when all the votes are tallied in some still too-close-to-call districts. Brulte vowed to return the GOP to relevance by rebuilding from the ground up when he took over as state party chair last year; while legislative super majorities these days are more symbolic than substantive, he also can claim partial credit for ousting at least two Democratic House incumbents, if nail-biting numbers hold up in final returns.
Democrats are really, really old: “When I had hair, Methuselah was walking the streets,” Brown cracked at an appearance in Torrance a few days before the election. Perhaps unintentionally, his self-deprecating joke highlighted the irrefutable fact that many longtime Democratic stars are getting awfully close to their sell-by dates. Dianne Feinstein (81) and Barbara Boxer (74) both lost powerful committee chairs in being pushed back to minority status amid the Republican’s recapture of the Senate, and must be mulling retirement; from Brown (76) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (74) to party chair John Burton (81) and a host of geezer Congress members (hello Lois Capps, 76) it’s time to let a new generation–AG Kamala Harris, Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom and Treasurer John Chiang, for starters—have a crack at top-level jobs.
At
Michigan Liberal,
Eric B. writes—
You people are all taking the wrong lesson from Tuesday night:
Two years ago, after Obama crushed Willard Romney, everyone started offering their post mortems on the state of the Republican Party, which on a national level had just taken an ass kicking. The most popular? Offer a positive alternative message to voters.
What did we get this year from Republicans at the national level? Ebola and ISIS, fear and terror. They won.
The misguided notion that anyone needs to put forth a more positive image for the future is based on the myth that most voters, at heart, as independent, undecided centrists who actually do things like tune in to debates and make decisions on who to vote for accordingly. [...]
In reality, there are Republican voters and there are Democratic voters. Republican voters are increasingly old and they are white. Democratic voters, right now, are everyone else. The trick is not to convince people to stop being one and start being the other. The trick is to get your people out to the polls using whatever means are possible.[...]
Democrats didn't lose this year for lack of positive message. Democrats lost this year because turnout was lower this year than it was even in 2010. Guess what drove Republicans to the polls in 2010? Fear of Obamacare, fear of Obama's many czars, fear of growing government, fear of taxation, fear of gun grabbing bureaucrats, fear of etc... This fear was fomenting with the sole purpose of getting Republican voters to the polls. It worked in 2002. It worked in 2004. It worked in 2010, and it worked Tuesday night. I mean, the guy who won ran a bunch of ads the last weekend about how voting for Mark Schauer was going to return us to the Lost Decade. That's fear, folks.
At
Blue Mass Group of Massachusetts,
jasui writes—
Democrats need to hire Daily Show writers:
After watching The Daily Show last night, I’m convinced that the whole messaging thing isn’t that hard. If their writers can give the lines to Jordan Klepper, why can’t someone give them to Democratic candidates?
Jordan Klepper: Last night, at approximately 11:27pm Eastern Time, the Republicans gained control of the US Senate, and results were almost immediate! The economy – now growing at a robust 3.5%. Gas this morning? Under three bucks a gallon. Look: Stock market at record levels; deficits cut in half; ten million more Americans have health insurance; and unemployment sub-6% for the first time since we elected “Chairman Obama.”
Jon Stewart: Well, wait! Hang on a second Jordan, because the things that you’re describing…
JK: And even Ebola, Jon, think about this, which was on the verge of destroying this country under Obama’s feckless leadership is suddenly only a problem now for one guy. It’s Morning In America, Jon!
JS: Jordan, that is an incredibly impressive list you’ve ticked off, of things that happened under Obama and the Democratic Senate.
JK: Oh, please, Jon! If Democrats had accomplished all that, they would have been out there bragging about it for months! It would have been the central message of their campaign, instead of their actual message, which was, like, I’m quoting this here, “I’m sorry! Don’t be mad! We don’t like Obama either! We like guns too!”.
At
Juanita Jean's of Texas,
Juanita Jean writes—
Win Governorship. Check. Win Texas House and Senate. Check. Kick Gay People to the Street. Check:
get tickled when Republicans point to Texas big cities as economic success stories. Every big city in Texas is governed by a Democrat. My favorite, of course, is Houston Mayor Annise Parker.
Amid chest thumping, Republicans have decided that she must go. For example, we get this today …
Two things about the author, J. Matt Barber. (1) he is a retired heavyweight boxer, and (2) he’s an idiot. But, I guess you already knew the second one.
annise-parkerParker terms-out in two years, which is a shame because she’s been an amazing mayor and was elected outright against five opponents last time. Yet, Barber wants to “boot her out the door,” and says “Parker’s head’s gotta roll.”
I don’t know if he’s really retired from boxing.
The thing he seems the most upset about is bathrooms. He says that LGBT men “who sign up for the ever-persecuted ‘LGBT’ class have secured the hard-fought ‘civil right’ to fully expose themselves to, and otherwise ogle, your daughters in the ladies’ room.” See #2 above. I don’t think he understands how women’s bathrooms, lewdness laws, or LGBT works.
At
Democratic Diva of Arizona,
Donna writes—
Why Don't Democrats Win in Arizona? Answer: Not Enough Democratic Voters:
I’m actually skeptical that young people will ever be interested in midterms. I didn’t start voting in them regularly until I was well in my thirties, which is the time most people do. There’s no historical precedent for it and no amount of scolding or cajoling seems to even get midterms on young people’s radars. That said, Loomis’ advice is good in general and ought to be heeded in Arizona, where Democrats do shitty in Presidential years, even though our demographics would suggest we shouldn’t. To understand why that might be, take a look at our state’s latest voter registration figures:
Democrats 936,417
Republicans 1,114,713
Other 1,157,811
Republicans begin with a nearly 180K voter advantage over Democrats. That means they need to attract far fewer “other” voters to win elections and the opposite is true for Democrats. As the number of non-affiliated voters has risen and Democratic ones have dwindled over the years I’ve been assured that this is no problem because Democrats will reach out to those “independent” voters with a strong message on education and the economy and how we’re the more sane and reasonable ones and … zzzzzz … yeah, you can see how well this is working out.
Another problem with being complacent about the low number of Democratic voters is that candidates who think they are close or behind in their races tend to develop a frantic “every man for himself” approach at Get Out The Vote (GOTV) time, where they are trying to get votes everywhere they can, including from a lot of non-Democratic voters. This could mean they are getting votes for themselves at the expense of other Democratic candidates if those voters are splitting their ballots, as non-partisan voters are more likely to do. This vote-splitting is not, contrary to the insistence of Serious Pundits, necessarily borne of careful consideration of the merits of each candidate and it is not without troubling implications to Democrats
At
Better Georgia,
Bryan Long writes—
We Believe:
When Better Georgia opened our doors three years ago, our goal was clear: empower progressive voices to make Georgia a better place.
The debate here had been between the right and the far right for far too long.
Today, we know that we've created a conversation that had been missing.
The election results last night were disappointing, but one thing is certain: Georgia is now a battleground state where the political debate is no longer limited to one party fighting with itself.
Georgia is a better place today than when we started.
In fact, our state has changed - for good. And it will continue to change.
Better Georgia exists because campaigns come and go. But we have to fight for the values we believe in every year, not just during election years.
We believe Georgia will be a better place tomorrow than it is today.
We believe strong progressive leaders are emerging in our state.
We believe that a progressive majority of voters are standing up to support those leaders.
Change doesn’t happen in one night - not even an election night.
It takes hard work, smart investment and long-term commitment to change.
At
Progress Illinois,
Aricka Flowers writes—
Chicago's Bungled Election Day: Robocall Investigation, Long Wait Times & Voter Suppression?:
Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez's office has initiated a criminal investigation into the robocalls made to election judges in the days leading up to Tuesday's election. The calls told the judges to come in for additional training and said they are required to vote in a certain manner in order to do the job.
According to reports, the calls were targeting Republican election judges as a means to ensure they would vote along party lines.
"At this point, we're just starting to take a look at it. There are no other real details to share at this time," said Sally Daly, a spokeswoman for the attorney's office, according to the Sun-Times. "In all elections we have complaints and inquiries -- this is one of several that we are looking into."
At Wednesday's Chicago City Council meeting, Mayor Rahm Emanuel called the robocalls "voter suppression or obstruction." Emanuel appears to be adamant about unearthing the culprits behind the robocall scheme and demanded at yesterday's council meeting that hearings be held on the issue.
At
The Seminole Democrat,
Independent Thinker writes—
Could the GOP Save Us From Rick Scott?:
As the gloom of four more years of Rick Scott settles over the state, I once again contemplated what horrors may be ahead. Many think that Scott, with no re-election restraints hanging over him, will return to his Tea Party roots and once again become the kind of terror that slashed funds for disabled children and rape crisis centers.
I certainly think we need to be prepared for that possibility, and I respect the views of those who think this will be the case. It isn't at all far-fetched. But I proposed earlier in a comment here that maybe Scott would instead turn his focus towards enriching himself as much as he could (such as by encouraging fracking in the Everglades) rather than cutting budget items. That's because I believe that Scott is truly a man of no principles, save his own personal gain: It seems to me the best way to explain why he abandoned his Tea Party promises like the Arizona-style immigration law, and verbally approved of other things that his Tea Party base found offensive, like Medicaid expansion. It is also why he calls himself pro-life even after making money off abortions at HCA.
After some thought, I'd like to propose a reason why this seems a more likely approach, and one we can hope will be true (although in the same sense we might hope to be hit with a fiddle instead of with a grand piano). Oddly enough, the nationwide GOP may be our best (albeit unwitting) ally in keeping Scott leashed. And no, it's not because they care about us—it's because they care about their own skins.
The GOP knows it needs Florida to win the Presidency in 2016. This is not in question. They need Texas AND Florida to balance the electoral weight of New York and California. Otherwise, they may as well not even field a candidate.
At
Bleeding Heartland of Iowa,
desmoinesdem writes—
We needed another six years from Tom Harkin:
From the day Senator Tom Harkin announced plans to retire, I had a bad feeling about Iowa Democrats defending an open U.S. Senate seat in a midterm year when Governor Terry Branstad would be on the ballot. Harkin may not have known other retirements would hand several Senate seats to Republicans practically before the campaigns began. He couldn't have anticipated that issues like ISIS terrorism and the ebola outbreak would dominate the media discourse during the last two months of the campaign. He probably didn't expect tens of millions of dollars to come into Iowa, amplifying Bruce Braley's every misstep (plus a bunch of made-up stuff) thousands of times.
I appreciate Harkin's many years of service in Congress and don't mean to begrudge him time with his family. But the bottom line is that if he had sought a sixth term, Republicans would not have fielded a serious Senate candidate in Iowa. Harkin would have cruised against a challenger on the "clown car" level of Christopher Reed.
In the coming days and weeks, plenty of Iowa Democrats will rail against tactical or strategic errors by Braley and his strategists. They'll have a point, but in a year like this, none of it mattered. Candidates who started their campaigns in a stronger position and ran better races (such as Senator Kay Hagan in North Carolina or independent Greg Orman in Kansas) had the same result. Almost every competitive Senate race shifted toward the Republican at the end. Good grief, Senator Mark Warner nearly lost Virginia, which wasn't even on the radar as a potential GOP pickup.
Instead of running for an open Senate seat in 2020 (a presidential election year), Iowa Democrats will have to find a candidate who can compete with the better-known and better-financed incumbent Senator Joni Ernst.
At
Louisiana Voices,
tomaswell writes—
Oh, to be able to see the world without strife and tension through the loving eyes of Bobby ‘the Benevolent’ Jindal:
Landrieu, when asked why President Obama was so unpopular in Louisiana, responded, “I’ll be very, very honest with you. The South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans.”
That one sentence was likely the most accurate claim made in this entire election cycle—by any candidate in any race.
Yet, Jindal chose that remark as his cue to lambast Landrieu, calling her statement “remarkably divisive,” and adding, “She appears to be living in a different century. Implied in her comments is the clear suggestion that President Obama and his policies are unpopular in Louisiana because of his ethnicity. That is a major insult by Senator Landrieu to the people of Louisiana and I flatly reject it.”
Well, Governor, perhaps if you shut your eyes tightly and click your heels together, the old prejudices and bigotry will disappear. But, unfortunately, just because you close your eyes to something, it doesn’t mean it isn’t there. And those of us who get out into the real world as opposed to tightly controlled support groups understand this.
A good example of the mindset that still lingers fifty years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was handed to me on Monday, Oct. 13 when I went to check my post office box at the Denham Springs post office. A woman, probably in her late fifties or early sixties entered right behind me. Unlike me, she wanted to do business at the counter only to find it closed. I reminded her it was Columbus Day and her response was: “Well, that must be for Mr. Obama. They wouldn’t close it for anyone else.”