Posts Tagged ‘
Arkansas ’
Tuesday, November 30th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
A rash of party-switching by former Democratic state legislatures in the South has drawn attention to the parlous condition of the Donkey Party in that region following a terrible midterm election. Jonathan Martin of Politico captured the zeitgeist with a much-discussed piece entitled, “Democratic South Finally Falls,” a testament not only to Republican gains in the region but to the advent of such endlessly predicted but long-delayed developments as the GOP conquest of the Alabama state legislature.
How bad was election night 2010 for southern Democrats? Well, there were a total of 14 Senate and gubernatorial races in the eleven states of the Old Confederacy, and Republicans won all of them except for the Arkansas governor’s race. Exactly one-third of the 66 House pickups for the GOP occurred in the same eleven states (along with one-third of the three Democratic pickups). Republicans gained control of four state legislative chambers (the House and Senate in both Alabama and North Carolina), then picked up control of the Louisiana House due to a party switch. Today Democrats control the Arkansas and Mississippi House and Senate; the Senate in Louisiana and Virginia; and nothing else. And the Mississippi, Louisiana, and Virginia bastions will be at risk in 2011.
Were there regional bright spots for Democrats? Sure, in individual races. But it’s hard to call, say, North Carolina a bright spot because endangered House Democrats Larry Kissel and Mike McIntyre survived, since the state legislature was lost for the first time since Reconstruction. Similarly, two of three targeted House Democrats in Georgia won, but Republicans swept all the statewide races for the first time ever, and are approaching a veto-proof supermajority in both state legislative chambers.
Democrats had unusually strong gubernatorial candidates facing Republicans with problems in four southern states: South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and Texas. All these Democrats lost.
Now it’s important to understand that the demographic turnout patterns that made the midterms so hospitable to Republicans nationally were especially strong in parts of the South, where the pro-Republican trend among older white voters in 2008 was especially pronounced, and the predictable falloff in African-American voting after a historic cycle was especially damaging to Democrats. That means Democrats will likely rebound (relatively speaking) in 2012 in the South as elsewhere. Indeed, post-midterm PPP polls of Virginia and North Carolina, the two southern states carried by Obama in 2008, show the president in pretty good shape in both for 2012.
What really happened in 2010 of enduring significance is that the post-Civil Rights Act era of ticket-splitting in the South, which enabled Democrats to do much better in state and local election than at the presidential level, is finally drawing to a close, with one important qualifier: as Republicans become the natural governing party of the South, they will also be vulnerable to unhappiness with the status quo, which could produce Democratic victories, particularly in states with an irreducibly strong Democratic base. Generally, though, congressional districts with a long history of going GOP in presidential races and Democratic in House races, like South Carolina’s 5th district or Mississippi’s 4th, aren’t likely coming back to the Democratic column now that their long-time incumbents have lost. In addition, as the party-switching in state legislatures demonstrates, Democrats will no longer benefit from being perceived as the party of convenience for ambitious politicos with flexible ideological views.
The upside for southern Democrats is that the long-term demographic trends favoring them in the region—growing minority populations, continued in-migration of less conservative voters, and the increased importance of “knowledge jobs”—haven’t gone away. And without question, southern Democrats are continuing to converge with their national counterparts in ideology as conservative white rural voters complete their migration out of the Democratic coalition. Overall, southerners will still be more moderate than Democrats from areas with a strong labor movement or a tradition of cultural progressivism, but much of the argument that southern Blue Dogs are muddling the message or obstructing the legislation of the national party has become moot.
Tags: 2012 presidential election, African-American, Alabama, Arkansas, Blue Dogs, cultural progressivism, Democratic pickups, Democratic South Finally Falls, Democratic state legislatures, Democrats, demographic trends, Donkey Party, Florida, Georgia, GOP, GOP pickups, Jonathan Martin, Larry Kissel, Louisiana, Mid-Term Elections, Mike McIntyre., Mississippi, North Carolina, Obama, Old Confederacy, party-switching, Politico, post-Civil Rights Act, PPP polls, Reconstruction, South, state and local election, Texas, Virginia, zeitgeist
Posted in
Daily Fix, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Wednesday, November 24th, 2010
Scott Andes
Scott M. Andes is a research analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.
by Scott Andes
When it comes to innovation-based growth, not all states are equal. Certain states are on the front lines, and are accordingly most likely to lead the way to economic recovery. According to a new report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, the most leading New Economy states all excel at supporting a knowledge infrastructure, spurring innovation, and encouraging entrepreneurship.
The new report, The 2010 State New Economy Index, uses 26 indicators to assess states’ fundamental capacity to successfully navigate economic change. It measures the extent to which state economies are knowledge-based, globalized, entrepreneurial, IT-driven and innovation-based – in other words, the degree to which state economies’ structures and operations match the ideal structure of the New Economy. Indicators include percent of the population online, fastest growing firms, exports, industry and state R&D among others.
The top five states – Massachusetts, Washington, Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut —are at the forefront of the nation’s movement toward a global, innovation-based economy. Massachusetts has been the top ranked state in all iterations of the report (1999, 2002, 2007 and 2008). The Bay State boasts a concentration of software, hardware, and biotech firms supported by world-class universities such as MIT and Harvard in the Route 128 region around Boston. It survived the early 2000s downturn and was less hard hit than the nation as a whole in the last recession. And it has continued to thrive, enjoying the fourth-highest increase in per-capita income. Washington State (which ranked fourth in 2007 and second in 2008) scores high due not only to its strength in software (in no small part due to Microsoft) and aviation (Boeing), but also because Puget Sound region has emerged as entrepreneurial hotbed.
Maryland remains third (as it was in 2007 and 2008, as well), in part because of the high concentration of knowledge workers, many employed in the District of Columbia suburbs and many in federal laboratory facilities or companies related to them. These and the other top ten New Economy states (New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, California, Virginia, Colorado, and New York) have more in common than just high-tech firms. They also tend to have a high concentration of managers, professionals, and college educated residents working in “knowledge jobs” (jobs that require at least a two-year degree). With one or two exceptions, their manufacturers tend to be more geared toward global markets, both in terms of export orientation and the amount of foreign direct investment.
All the top ten states also show above-average levels of entrepreneurship, even though some, like Massachusetts and Connecticut, are not growing rapidly in employment. Most are at the forefront of the IT revolution, with a large share of their institutions and residents embracing the digital economy. In fact, the variable that is more closely correlated with a high overall ranking is jobs in IT occupations outside the IT industry itself. Most have a solid “innovation infrastructure” that fosters and supports technological innovation. Many have high levels of domestic and foreign immigration of highly mobile, highly skilled knowledge workers seeking good employment opportunities coupled with a good quality of life.
The two states whose economies have lagged most in making the transition to the New Economy are Mississippi and West Virginia. Other states with low scores include, in reverse order, Arkansas, Alabama, Wyoming, South Dakota, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. Historically, the economies of many of these and other Southern and Plains states depended on natural resources or on mass production manufacturing, and relied on low labor costs rather than innovative capacity, to gain advantage. But innovative capacity (derived through universities, R&D investments, scientists and engineers, and entrepreneurial drive) is increasingly what drives competitive success.
While lower ranking states face challenges, they also can take advantage of new opportunities. The IT revolution gives companies and individuals more geographical freedom, making it easier for businesses to relocate, or start up and grow in less densely populated states farther away from existing agglomerations of industry and commerce. Moreover, notwithstanding the recent decline in housing prices, metropolitan areas in many of the top states suffer from high costs (largely due to high land and housing costs) and near gridlock on their roads. Both factors may make locating in less-congested metros, many in lower ranking states, more attractive, particularly if their metropolitan areas offer high-quality schools, high-quality and efficient government, and a robust infrastructure.
Perhaps the most distinctive feature of the New Economy is its relentless levels of structural economic change. The challenges facing states in a few years could well be different than the challenges today. But notwithstanding this, the keys to success in the new economy now and into the future appear clear: supporting a knowledge infrastructure (world class education and training); spurring innovation (indirectly through universities and directly by helping companies); and encouraging entrepreneurship. In the past decade a new practice of economic development focused on these three building blocks has emerged, at least at the level of best practice, if not at the level of widespread practice. The challenge for states will be to adopt and deepen these best practices and continue to generate new economy policy innovations and drive the kinds of institutional changes needed to implement them.
photo credit: Chantal Wagner
Tags: Alabama, and Connecticut, Arkansas, biotech firms, Boeing, Boston, California, college-educated, Colorado, Connecticut, DC, Delaware, digital economy, domestic immigration, downturn, economic recovery, entrepreneurship, foreign direct investment, foreign immigration, global markets, Harvard, high quality schools, high-tech firms, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, Innovation, innovation capacity, innovation infrastructure, innovation-based growth, IT-driven, Kentucky, knowledge jobs, knowledge-based, Louisiana, low labor costs, managers, Maryland, Massachusetts, Microsoft, Mississippi, MIT, New Economy States, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Puget Sound, quality of life, R&D, recession, Route 128, South Dakota, state economies, structural economic change, The 2010 State New Economy Index, Virginia, Washington state, West Virginia, Wyoming
Posted in
A New Framework for Growth and Equity, Daily Fix |
No Comments »
Friday, October 1st, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
Just a month out now from Election Day, national political crosswinds are beginning to yield in importance to the sometimes idiosyncratic dynamics of key individual campaigns. In the second of our series of regional takes on statewide and congressional races, we´ll take a quick look today at the South (using the Old Confederacy definition of the region).
This was, by any measurement, Barack Obama´s worst region in 2008, despite important victories in Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida. He trailed John Kerry´s performance in Arkansas and Tennessee, and his percentage of the white vote was abysmal in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana as well. Negative attitudes towards him have clearly deepened throughout the region during 2009 and 2010.
The South also has the nation´s richest lode of Democratic House members in districts carried by John McCain in 2008—23 out of 49. Considering the pro-Republican shape of the midterm electorate, and the erosion of Obama support, all these Democrats, plus many others in districts narrowly carried by Obama, entered 2010 in some serious danger.
There is only one Senate Democrat from the South up for re-election this year, Arkansas´ Blanche Lincoln, whose campaign appears to have fallen hopelessly behind Republican John Boozman even before her close primary runoff victory over Bill Halter.
The two Republican Senate seats thought to be within reach of Democrats are in North Carolina, where Elaine Marshall has run a credible race against Sen. Richard Burr, but is running out of time and money needed to score an upset; and in Florida, where the steady decline of Charlie Crist´s vote seems to be giving Marco Rubio an insurmountable lead.
Gubernatorial races are a relative bright spot for southern Democrats. Tennessee looks very likely to flip from D to R, and Alabama´s a very long shot for Democrat Ronnie Sparks, but in FL, Alex Sink is in a dead heat with Republican Rick Scott; in Georgia, the ethical and financial problems of GOP nominee Nathan Deal are keeping Roy Barnes in close contention; and in Texas, Bill White is running a very competitive race against Rick Perry. In Arkansas, Democratic incumbent Mike Beebe so far looks immune to the tsunami that has engulfed Blance Lincoln.
House races, as always, are harder to assess. Louisiana features a rare Republican-held district that Democrats are favored to flip, though accidental congressman Joseph Cao can´t be counted out. Overall, Democratic retirements have created major problems: the Cook Political Report rates five open southern House seats as “likely Republican,” and another as “lean Republican.” And among incumbents, twelve southern House Democrats are in races rated as tossups by Cook, with another seven in the competitive “lean Democratic” category.
All in all, that means 24 Democratic House seats in the South—2 in AL, 3 in AR, 5 in FL, 2 in GA, 1 in LA, 1 in MS, 2 in NC, 3 in TN, 2 in TX, and 3 in VA—are vulnerable in November 2. One big question involves African-American turnout, which is sometimes relatively robust in midterm election. Another is whether Republicans can count on a late surge in a region where anti-Obama and anti-Democratic leanings have been solidified for quite some time.
Photo credit: cfarivar
Tags: African-American, AL, Alabama, Alex Sink, anti-Democratic, anti-Obama, AR, Arkansas, Barack Obama, Bill Halter, Bill White, Blance Lincoln, Blanche Lincoln, Campaigns and elections, Charlie Crist, Democratic House members, Democratic Party, Elaine Marshall, Election Day, FL, Florida, GA, Georgia, GOP, Gubernatorial races, John Boozman, John Kerry, John McCain, Joseph Cao, LA, lean Democratic, lean Republican, likely Republican, Louisiana, Marco Rubio, midterm electorate, Mike Beebe, Mississippi, MS, Nathan Deal, NC, North Carolina, November 2, Old Confederacy, political crosswinds, Richard Burr, Rick Perry, Rick Scott, ronnie sparks, Roy Barnes, Senate Democrat, South, Tennessee, Texas, TN, TX, VA, Virginia
Posted in
Daily Fix, Political Memo |
1 Comment »
Saturday, June 19th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
If you want a pretty good indication of the power of ideology in today’s Republican Party, check out the latest endorsement of front-runner Nikki Haley for the Republican gubernatorial nomination just before next Tuesday’s runoff:
So let’s get this straight … we know for a fact that S.C. Rep. Nikki Haley is lying through her teeth every time she denies our founding editor’s claim that she had an “inappropriate physical relationship” with him in the Spring of 2007. On top of that, we also know for a fact that her political career could very well go down in flames if (and more likely “when”) this ticking time bomb goes off …
And yet we’re endorsing her for the 2010 S.C. Republican gubernatorial nomination anyway?
Correct….
[T]he bottom line for S.C. taxpayers is that Haley would vote the right way on the S.C. Budget and Control Board, use her veto pen to reduce the size and scope of government and sign a universal parental choice bill which would (at long last) provide parents with real options and our flawed system with real, market-based accountability.
Yes, Haley has been endorsed by the web page of South Carolina blogger Will Folks, whose allegation of an affair with Haley turned the gubernatorial race upside down. Unless you buy the theory that Folks and Haley actually cooked up the whole J’accuse to preempt rumors about her sex life and make her a martyr, Folks’ endorsement looks like a powerful validator of the notion that being Right is more important than being right to today’s conservative activists.
There haven’t been any public polls on this race released since the June 8 primary, but a pre-primary poll by PPP that asked about a hypothetical Haley-Gresham Barrett runoff showed her up 51-35. This was before third-place finisher Henry McMaster endorsed Haley.
In North Carolina, where Democrats are having a Senate runoff on Tuesday, the only post-primary poll (again, by PPP) showed first-place primary finisher Elaine Marshall and DSCC favorite Cal Cunningham even at 36 percent with a large undecided vote. But that was more than a month ago, and given the likelihood of very low turnout, anything could happen. Marshall was endorsed by third-place finisher Ken Lewis, buttressing her advantage among African-Americans, and also by MoveOn.
And in Utah, whose primary is also on Tuesday, a poll taken for Mike Lee’s campaign showed him leading Tim Bridgewater in the Republican Senate race 39-30. Bridgewater, a hard-core conservative but in better standing than Lee with the GOP establishment, has been endorsed by defeated incumbent Sen. Bob Bennett and also by fourth-place finisher Cherilyn Eager.
Poll Watch
In polling news, it’s a sign of the trouble that the long-time front-runner in the Florida Republican gubernatorial race, Bill McCollum, is experiencing with free-spending late-entering candidate Rick Scott that McCollum has released a poll showing them running dead even.
A new Sooner Poll of the Oklahoma Democratic gubernatorial race (the primary is on July 27) shows Attorney General Drew Edmondson holding just a one-point lead over Lt. Gov. Jari Askins.
Rasmussen has three new general-election gubernatorial polls out. In Texas, they show Rick Perry with a 48-40 lead over Bill White, although White has a somewhat better approval-disapproval ratio than the incumbent. In Tennessee, they show all three major Republican gubernatorial candidates with double-digit leads over Democrat Mike McWherter. And in Arkansas, Democratic incumbent Mike Beebe enjoys a 57-33 lead over Republican nominee Jim Keet, a slightly higher margin than he had in May.
Tags: Arkansas, Bill McCollum, Bill White, Bob Bennett, Cal Cunningham, Campaigns and elections, Cherilyn Eager, Conservatism, Democratic Party, Drew Edmondson, Elaine Marshall, Florida, Gresham Barrett, Henry McMaster, Jari Askins, Jim Keet, Ken Lewis, Mike Beebe, Mike Lee, Mike McWherter, Nikki Haley, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Politics and politicians, Public opinion, Rasmussen, Republican Party, Rick Perry, Rick Scott, South Carolina, Texas, Tim Bridgewater, Utah, Will Folks
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Friday, June 11th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
In my last political memo on June 8, I made some predictions for that day’s primaries. Let’s see how I did.
Arkansas Senate Runoff: Too Close to Call. I questioned the CW favoring Halter over Lincoln, and in the end, Lincoln’s GOTV effort (with a little help from Big Dog Bill Clinton) was just enough.
South Carolina Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Nikki Haley Wins. Actually, I went right over the brink and predicted that Haley would win without a runoff, and she came about as close as possible — with 49 percent of the vote — as she could. In fact, distant second-place finisher Rep. Gresham Barrett immediately came under pressure to drop out and give Haley the nomination without further ado, but it looks like he’ll roll the dice for the short two-week runoff contest, which everyone thinks Haley will easily win (unless those accusing her of sexual misbehavior finally come up with some real evidence).
South Carolina Democratic Gubernatorial Primary: Sheheen/Rex Runoff. I was right in saying that third-place finisher Rep. Robert Ford would do well enough to force a runoff, but didn’t account for one-time front-runner Jim Rex running so poorly that state Rep. Vincent Sheheen was able to romp to victory anyway.
Iowa Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Terry Branstad wins. Check, though his nine-point margin of victory over outgunned conservative Bob Vander Plaats was a lot smaller than the polls suggested, and indicates the residual strength of social conservatives in the Iowa GOP — which will be much more powerful in the context of a presidential caucus.
Nevada Republican Senate Primary: Sharron Angle wins. Check. Angle won very easily, even carrying Clark County (Las Vegas). The real surprise here is that Danny Tarkanian, whom some experts thought might pull an upset in this race, finished a poor third. So Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) got the match-up he wanted.
Nevada Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Attorney General Brian Sandoval wins. Check; the Gibbons Era is over, and Rory Reid begins the general election as an underdog.
California Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Meg Whitman wins. Yep, and she only spent about $80 per vote.
California Republican Senate Primary: Carly Fiorina wins. She even took Marin County, which should have been Tom Campbell Country if any place was.
South Dakota Republican gubernatorial primary: Lt. Gov. Dennis Daugaard wins. He won more votes than all his opponents combined.
I refused to make any prediction in Maine, where “undecided” was the dominant presence in pre-election polls for both parties’ gubernatorial primaries. In the end, state senate president Libby Mitchell won the Democratic nod, and Tea Party favorite Paul LePage won the Republican nomination. But independent Eliot Cutler will be competitive in the general election.
In other significant developments, Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC) of South Carolina got knocked into a runoff by tea party avatar Trey Gowdy. California voters approved Prop 14, abolishing party primaries in favor of a “jungle primary” system (like Washington State’s) where the top two finishers among candidates from all or no parties advance to the general election.
The next election day is June 22, when Utah holds its primary, while North and South Carolina, Mississippi and South Dakota hold runoffs.
In Alabama, the third-place finisher in the June 1 Republican gubernatorial primary, Tim James, is pursuing a recount to see if he can overcome Robert Bentley’s 167-vote lead for a second runoff spot against Bradley Byrne. The runoff is on July 13.
In the most interesting poll to be released in the last few days, Quinnipiac finds two self-funding candidates making a big splash in Florida. Former health care exec Rick Scott has ridden a batch of ads (mostly expressing his fondness for Arizona’s new immigration law) to a stunning lead over Attorney General Bill McCollum in the Republican gubernatorial primary; McCollum had been presumed to be the certain nominee until now. And in the Democratic Senate primary, billionaire Jeff Greene has pulled nearly even with congressman Kendrick Meek.
In more general polling news, DailyKos has terminated its relationship with the Research 2000 polling firm, which had been doing a lot of state ads for DKos. And in a very related development, FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver released an updated version of his comprehensive rating of pollsters for accuracy.
Photo credit: Tom Prete’s Photostream
Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday
Tags: Alabama, Arkansas, Bill Clinton, Bill Halter, Bill McCollum, Blanche Lincoln, Bob Inglis, Bob Vander Plaats, Bradley Byrne, Brian Sandoval, California, Campaigns and elections, Carly Fiorina, Danny Tarkanian, Democratic Party, Dennis Daugaard, Eliot Cutler, Gresham Barrett, Harry Reid, Iowa, Jeff Greene, Jim Rex, Kendrick Meek, Libby Mitchell, Meg Whitman, Nevada, Nikki Haley, Paul LePage, Politics and politicians, Republican Party, Rick Scott, Robert Bentley, Robert Ford, Rory Reid, Sharron Angle, South Carolina, Tea Party, Terry Branstad, Tim James, Trey Gowdy, Utah, Vincent Sheheen
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Thursday, June 10th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
For those of us in the politics biz, Tuesday night was a long night, with returns trickling out over a eight-hour period. Despite the best efforts of headline writers to impose some order on the 10 primaries, one runoff and one special-election runoff, there was no overriding pattern or big theme to these elections: just a lot of individual contests whose importance we mostly won’t even know until November. I won’t try to cover everything that happened; you can consult news sources for detailed results. But there were some pretty interesting happenings.
The biggest surprise for the chattering classes (and I’ll plead innocence on this one, since I consistently labeled it as too close to call) was the survival of Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, whose dominant performance in Pulaski County (Little Rock), her opponent’s home base, was crucial. The heavy commitment of resources by the labor movement on behalf of Bill Halter will be second-guessed for quite some time. And once again, it’s been established that you don’t mess with Bill Clinton in his old stomping grounds.
Probably the second biggest story of the night was Nikki Haley, who came within an eyelash of winning the South Carolina Republican gubernatorial nomination without a runoff. Rep. Gresham Barrett finished a distant second, and is already getting pressure to drop out save the GOP the trouble of a runoff. It’s clear in retrospect that the maelstrom of the last two weeks, in which Haley was hit with two separate poorly documented allegations of marital infidelity, gave her a significant sympathy vote and all but extinguished the ability of her opponents to get any kind of message out. Meanwhile, state rep. Vincent Sheheen scored an impressive majority win in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, and can now spend his time raising money and watching future developments, if any, in the Haley saga.
The third biggest story of the night was in Nevada, where the easy victory of Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle in the Republican Senate primary gave Harry Reid the matchup he wanted for November. Angle benefitted from the implosion of longtime front-runner Sue Lowden, and from national conservative support. Third-place finisher Danny Tarkanian faded in the clutch even more than Lowden.
Speaking of the Tea Folk, their movement had a very mixed evening. Establishment Republican candidates turned back Tea Party-affiliated challengers in Virginia and New Jersey. But in South Carolina, Rep. Bob Inglis, who made the mistake of voting for TARP, was knocked into a runoff by local DA Trey Gowdy, and will be the heavy underdog going forward.
One result with significant 2012 implications was in Iowa, where as expected, former Gov. Terry Branstad beat conservative firebrand Bob Vander Plaats for the Republican gubernatorial nomination. But given his many advantages in the race, Branstad’s nine-point margin of victory was underwhelming, and should warn potential presidential candidates that the social conservative forces represented by Vander Plaats could be more formidable than ever in the 2012 caucuses. Certainly Sarah Palin, whose late endorsement of Branstad enraged some of her Iowa fans, will need to do some repair work if she’s interested in entering the contest that will begin in Iowa.
And finally, in a result that got virtually no national attention but that could prove important down the road, California voters approved Proposition 14, which abolishes party primaries in favor of a “jungle primary” in which the top two finishers, regardless of political affiliation, meet in a runoff if no candidate wins 50 percent.
This item is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist.
Tags: Arkansas, Bill Clinton, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Bob Inglis, Bob Vander Plaats, California, Campaigns and elections, Danny Tarkanian, Democratic Party, Gresham Barrett, Harry Reid, Iowa, Nevada, New Jersey, Nikki Haley, Politics and politicians, Republican Party, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, South Carolina, Sue Lowden, Tea Party, Terry Branstad, Trey Gowdy, Vincent Sheheen, Virginia
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics |
No Comments »
Tuesday, June 8th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
The busiest primary day of the year has arrived, with 10 primaries, one Senate runoff and one House special election runoff on tap.
Since I’ve earlier analyzed most of these races here (and here, and here), today’s memo will focus on the bottom line: Who is likely to win in the big statewide contests?
Arkansas Senate Democratic runoff: too close to call. The CW suggests that Bill Halter will knock off Blanche Lincoln, thanks to a relatively poor showing by the incumbent in the primary, and a stalwart effort by unions on Halter’s behalf. But in a very low turnout runoff, it’s all about getting the vote out, and we’ll have to see if Halter can get voters back out in areas like southern Arkansas, where he crushed Lincoln in the primary.
South Carolina Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Nikki Haley wins. This race has been All About Nikki in recent weeks, and since primary day has arrived without any real evidence to support the two allegations of marital infidelity against Haley, the whole saga seems to have actually helped her. She’s at 43 percent in the latest PPP poll, with Rep. Gresham Barrett running 20 points behind. I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that the backlash against her tormenters will lift Haley to a win without a runoff.
South Carolina Democratic Gubernatorial Primary: Sheheen/Rex runoff. State Rep. Vincent Sheheen has outspent and outcampaigned early front-runner Jim Rex, but a third candidate, state Sen. Robert Ford, is strong enough to force a runoff.
Iowa Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Terry Branstad wins. Bob Vander Plaats got heavily outspent and outmaneuvered in this potentially close primary with important 2012 implications. If it were a caucus, the arch-conservative might have a chance. But it’s a primary. Sarah Palin’s surprise endorsement of Branstad simply served as the coup de grace. Yesterday a bitter Vander Plaats said: “From where I live in Sioux City, I can’t see Russia, but I can see South Dakota.”
Nevada Republican Senate Primary: Sharron Angle wins. The implosion of early front-runner Sue “Chickens for Checkups” Lowden has been the big story in this race, and she’ll probably finish third behind Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle and basketball scion Danny Tarkanian. Tark the Younger could pull an upset based on GOP voter fears that Angle is the weakest challenger to Harry Reid.
Nevada Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Brian Sandoval wins. One of America’s more colorful gubernatorial tenures will come to a close tonight, when scandalicious incumbent Jim Gibbons loses to Attorney General Brian Sandoval, a prized Latino candidate for the GOP.
California Republican Gubernatorial Primary: Meg Whitman wins. It took her $80 million, and a strategic veer to the right that will haunt her general election campaign against Jerry Brown, but eMeg finally put away Steve Poizner in the late stages of this contest. After a gazillion Whitman ads calling him a dangerous liberal, Poizner might have a future in Democratic politics.
California Republican Senate Primary: Carly Fiorina wins. It only took her about $7 million, but Fiorina closed well against cash-strapped “demon sheep” Tom Campbell and crusty conservative Chuck DeVore. But she has recently lost ground against Barbara Boxer, and her pro-life and hard-core anti-immigrant positions will not help her in the general election.
South Dakota Republican gubernatorial primary: Dennis Daugaard wins. Lt. Gov. Daugaard has been the front-runner all along, and should edge past state senator Dave Knudson for the right to face Democrat Scott Heidepriem. I have to say, the whole contest reads like the credits in an Ingmar Bergman movie.
I won’t even begin to make any prediction in today’s Mystery Election, the Maine gubernatorial contest. According to the one public poll, taken just this last week, 62 percent of Democrats and 47 percent of Republicans are undecided. The “leading” candidate in the Democratic race came in at 13% percent, and the leading Republican at 17 percent. Turnout is expected to be in the teens. Perhaps in the end Meg Whitman should have moved to Maine and saved herself a whole lot of money.
There are a number of interesting House primaries today. One to watch is in South Carolina, where TARP-afflicted Republican Rep. Bob Inglis is in deep trouble against Tea Party activist Trey Gowdy, though a runoff is likely. In a special election (two Republicans made the runoff) to replace Georgia gubernatorial candidate Nathan Deal in the House, another Tea Party favorite, Tom Graves, appeared to be cruising towards victory until a financial scandal erupted, and now he’s in a close race against Lee Hawkins. In California, antiwar activist Marcy Winograd is making another run against Democratic incumbent Jane Harman, though Harman is heavily favored.
In a non-candidate election matter, generally disgruntled Californians are likely to approve Proposition 14, which would create a Louisiana-style “jungle primary” system, essentially abolishing party primaries.
Photo credit: Hjl’s Photostream
Tags: Arkansas, Barbara Boxer, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Bob Inglis, Bob Vander Plaats, Brian Sandoval, Carly Fiorina, Chuck DeVore, Danny Tarkanian, Dave Knudson, Dennis Daugaard, Gresham Barrett, Harry Reid, Ingmar Bergman, Jane Harman, Jerry Brown, Jim Gibbons, Jim Rex, Lee Hawkins, Marcy Winograd, Meg Whitman, Nathan Deal, Nikki Haley, Robert Ford, Sarah Palin, Scott Heidepriem, Sharron Angle, Steve Poizner, Sue Lowden, Terry Branstad, Tom Campbell, Tom Graves, Trey Gowdy, Vincent Sheheen
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Monday, June 7th, 2010
Will Marshall
Will Marshall is the president of the Progressive Policy Institute.
by Will Marshall
Organized labor may be struggling to attract members, but it apparently has abundant cash to spend on a counterproductive campaign to impose ideological conformity on the Democratic Party.
A coalition of unions has targeted Sen. Blanche Lincoln, who stands accused of excessive moderation. Lincoln’s campaign says the unions have spent $10 million to defeat her in tomorrow’s Democratic primary in Arkansas. As Chris Cillizza reports in today’s Washington Post:
Ostensibly, Lincoln’s opponent is Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. But the practical reality is that she is running against a handful of major labor unions — the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, to name two.
Labor accuses Lincoln of deviating from the party line on two key issues. She opposed the “public option” in health care and doesn’t support the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), labor’s top legislative priority. EFCA, aka “card check,” would make it easier for unions to organize.
It seems odd to make the public option a retroactive litmus test, especially since Lincoln joined with all the Senate Democrats to vote for the landmark health care reform bill. (She was a “no” on the “fixes” to the bill passed via reconciliation, but health reform was by then already law of the land.) And President Obama himself was less than passionate about the public option, making it clear that he wouldn’t let it get in the way of passing the bill.
As for EFCA, unions are incensed that the bill won’t move, despite endorsements from the president and Democratic congressional leaders. But Lincoln is hardly the only moderate Senate Democrat who has qualms about the bill, which is why it remains snagged. If progressives are honest with themselves, they will admit that EFCA’s provisions for card check elections and for binding arbitration will need tweaking to get through the Senate.
The unimpeachably liberal Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) has signaled his willingness to negotiate changes aimed at winning moderates’ support. But so far, labor seems more interested in having an issue than in having a bill.
Fine, but is labor’s pique with Lincoln over the public option and card check really worth the risk of whittling down the Democrats’ majority in the Senate, one likely to become even more precarious after the midterm elections?
According to the Post, some labor officials don’t really care if Lincoln loses – the very threat that she and other moderates can be “primaried” for ideological offenses is sufficient to keep them in line. This flexing of labor’s political muscles to intimidate friends may be gratifying, but it’s politically dumb. It ignores the reality that the progressive coalition needs both liberals and moderates to sustain a governing majority, and that if you target moderate Democrats running in moderate-to-conservative states, you’ll enhance the odds of getting a Republican.
Former President Bill Clinton gets it. He’s made several appearances for Lincoln, urging Arkansas Democrats not to get swept up in crusades by outside pressure groups to purge moderates. The curious role played by Halter in this Razorback saga also deserves attention. A card-carrying centrist who worked in the Clinton administration, Halter is no Joe Hill. In allowing himself to be labor’s instrument for punishing a fellow pragmatist, he’s raised questions about his own authenticity, even as he attacks Lincoln for being a captive of Washington.
Even if Halter wins and goes to the Senate, the public option will still be history, EFCA will still be stalled and Democrats will still need moderates from red states to hold onto a majority. Labor also has to operate within the broader progressive coalition, and it can surely find better ways to invest its money than in fomenting dissension within the ranks.
Photo credit: USDAgov’s Photostream
Tags: American Federation of State, Arkansas, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Campaigns and elections, Chris Cillizza, Democratic Party, Employee Free Choice Act, Health care, Joe Hill, Politics and politicians, Service Employees International, Tom Harkin, Washington Post
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics |
2 Comments »
Tuesday, May 18th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
Today is a major primary day, with Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Arkansas holding Senate primaries, and Oregon a gubernatorial primary. I’ll deal with these by poll closing times: Kentucky at 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. EDT; Pennsylvania at 8 p.m. EDT; Arkansas at 8:30 p.m. EDT; and Oregon at 10 p.m. EDT.
In Kentucky, it looks like Rand Paul is very likely to win the GOP Senate nomination, beating Secretary of State Trey Grayson, the fair-hair child of the Bluegrass Republican establishment, and particularly of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Paul has been leading Grayson steadily in every recent poll, and the latest, from Magellan Strategies, shows Paul pulling away with a 55/30 lead. Another recent poll, from PPP, shows that fully one-third of Kentucky Republicans think their party is “too liberal,” and it’s these voters who are fueling Paul’s surge. Even though this is a closed primary and Paul is in many respects a conventional if extreme conservative, as indicated by the endorsements he received from Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint and James Dobson, expect to hear a lot of “Tea Party Insurgency!” hype when the results come in tonight. Hype aside, Paul’s non-interventionist views on foreign policy, which are similar to his father’s, are unusual for a Republican politician, and it’s quite interesting that Grayson’s attacks on them didn’t gain much traction.
The Democratic Senate primary will likely provide the only real drama in Kentucky tonight, with polls indicating a close race between Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo and Attorney General Jack Conway. Though Conway has been endorsed by MoveOn.org, the contest hasn’t been particularly ideological; both candidates oppose cap-and-trade legislation, and while Mongiardo has said he would have voted against health reform in the Senate, it’s because the bill “didn’t go far enough.” Conway has had a significant financial edge, and seems to have some late momentum, but the geographical turnout patterns —Mongiardo is from Eastern Kentucky, while Conway is from Louisville — will probably determine the result. Both candidates trail Paul in general election polls by a considerable margin.
Pennsylvania’s Democratic Senate primary is a genuine barn-burner, with party-switching incumbent Arlen Specter trying to hold off a late surge by Rep. Joe Sestak. Every poll in the last week has shown Specter losing his relatively large lead over Sestak, as the challenger benefits both from the support of progressives who dislike Specter’s partisan background and from moderate-to-conservative Democrats who don’t like his social liberalism or his current pattern of staunch support for the Obama administration. It is universally conceded that the race will all come down to turnout, with Specter—who is being backed not only by the Obama administration, the DSCC, and Gov. Ed Rendell’s organization, but also by most major unions—counting on a large turnout from Philadelphia, where he has a huge lead among African-Americans. Both candidates have trailed Republican Pat Toomey in most polls, though Sestak’s general election numbers have been significantly improving recently.
The other Pennsylvania race drawing national attention has been the special election to replace the late Rep. John Murtha. It’s the classic Western PA white-working-class district: it’s been represented by Democrats since the New Deal, and was carried by both Al Gore and John Kerry, but not by Barack Obama. Unsurprisingly, the most recent public polling, by PPP, showed a dead heat between Democrat Mark Critz and Republican Tim Burns. A Democratic hold in this seat, widely expected to go Republican when Murtha died, would provide a real boost to Democratic morale.
In Arkansas, the marquee contest matches Lt. Gov. Bill Halter against Sen. Blanche Lincoln, but the race has almost been overshadowed by national interests. Halter has strong backing from a variety of unions who are enraged by Lincoln’s flip-flop on the Employee Free Choice Act, while the incumbent, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, has received massive backing from the agribusiness and financial industries. Millions are being spent on both sides on “independent” ads attacking one candidate or the other. Lincoln is also being supported by the president and by former president Clinton.
Polls have consistently shown Lincoln leading Halter, but with less than 50 percent of the vote. If Lincoln or Halter is unable to win a majority of the votes, they will faceoff in a runoff election as required in Arkansas. There is a sizable undecided vote among African-Americans, who lean towards Halter, and Lincoln’s campaign has been running Obama and Clinton radio ads aimed at African-Americans. Regional turnout will also be a big factor, with Lincoln expected to do well in the Delta region she used to represent in the House, and Halter expected to do well in Little Rock. The contest could well serve as a lab experiment on the ancient proposition that undecided voters invariably turn against incumbents; if Lincoln gets a decent share of the undecided vote, she should win.
The Republican Senate primary is a low-profile affair with eight candidates, and it’s been generally assumed that Rep. John Boozman will win, probably without a runoff. Boozman will be helped by geography: he represents northwest Arkansas, a heavily Republican area where turnout will be boosted by a highly competitive primary to choose his replacement in the House. But two other candidates in the field, state senator Gilbert Baker, who is from central Arkansas, and former statewide candidate Jim Holt, a fiery Tea Party-style conservative who shares Boozman’s geographical base, could get enough support to force him into a runoff, particularly if voters respond to attacks on Boozman for supporting TARP.
Every poll taken this cycle has shown both Lincoln and Halter trailing every named Republican in general election trial heats. The big question is whether Arkansas’ strong tradition of voting Democratic downballot even when support for the national party is weak is finally expiring as it has in other parts of the Deep South.
In Oregon, limited polling predicts that former Gov. John Kitzhaber will easily win the Democratic gubernatorial nomination over former Secretary of State Bill Bradbury. His Republican opponent is expected to be former Portland Trail Blazer Chris Dudley, but don’t be surprised if conservative Allen Alley pulls an upset, as one late poll suggests is possible.
Finally, in non-primary political news, a major brouhaha has broken out in Connecticut, where Democratic Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who was the heavy favorite to hold onto Chris Dodd’s Senate seat in November, was the subject of a big New York Times story (fed by one of his Republican rivals) revealing that he has on at least one occasion referred to himself as a veteran of the Vietnam War. It turns out that he’s not; he served in the Marine Reserves during that war, but never deployed. At the moment, the DSCC is standing by Blumenthal, but Connecticut Democrats do have the option of choosing another candidate in their state convention, which will be held this weekend.
Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.
Tags: Arkansas, Barack Obama, Blanche Lincoln, Campaigns and elections, Chris Dodd, Connecticut, Conservatism, conservatives, Democratic Party, John Murtha, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Politics and politicians, progressives, Progressivism, Public opinion, Republican Party, Tea Party
Posted in
Daily Fix, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Friday, May 14th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
There were two House elections of note earlier this week. The one which earned national attention was in West Virginia, where ethics-challenged Rep. Alan Mollohan (D), who had served 14 terms in office, was beaten decisively by Democratic primary opponent state senator Mike Oliverio. The winner styles himself as a conservative Democrat, but given Mollohan’s own relatively conservative record, it’s likely the result had less to do with ideology than with serial investigations of the incumbent for alleged conflicts of interest associated with his chairmanship of an appropriations subcommittee. This seat has been targeted by Republicans, and Oliverio may be harder to beat than a wounded Mollohan.
Down in Georgia, a special election was held to replace Republican Rep. Nathan Deal, who resigned his seat to “concentrate” on his gubernatorial races; Deal was also being investigated and criticized by the Ethics Committee for alleged interference with a state grant program that benefitted his own business. In the heavily Republican mountain district, the big issue was strong Tea Party and Club for Growth backing for former state Rep. Tom Graves, who finished first with 35 percent of the vote, but will face a June 8 runoff with a more conventional Republican, former state senator Lee Hawkins, who gained 23 percent of the vote. Graves will be favored in the runoff, but will have to run for a full term beginning with a primary on July 8.
Next Tuesday primaries will be held in Arkansas, Kentucky, Oregon and Pennsylvania. In Arkansas, Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) is in a close primary battle with Lt. Gov. Bill Halter; there are competitive primaries in both parties for a Senate seat in Kentucky; Oregon will feature a comeback bid by former Gov. John Kitzhaber; and in Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter is in serious trouble from a challenge by Joe Sestak. I’ll have more about those races on Tuesday morning.
Poll Watch
Polling news includes a very interesting Mason-Dixon survey of the Republican Senate primary race in Nevada. When asked if the “Chickens For Checkups” controversy involving longtime frontrunner Sue Lowden affected their likely vote, Nevada Republicans generally said it would not. But for no other apparent reason, Lowden’s support has dropped significantly since the last Mason-Dixon poll in April, and she’s now locked in a competitive three-way race in which Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle has suddenly leapt into second place. The poll gave Lowden 30 percent, Angle 25 percent, and Danny Tarkanian 22 percent. The primary is on June 8, and the winner will face Harry Reid.
A new Rasmussen survey in New Hampshire shows Republican former Attorney General Kelly Ayotte continuing to hold a solid (50/38) lead over Democratic Rep. Paul Hodes for the seat held by retiring Sen. Judd Gregg. A DKos/R2K poll in Kentucky suggests that Democrats Dan Mongiardo and Jack Conway are in a dead heat, while on the GOP side, Rand Paul holds a 10-point lead over Trey Grayson.
Yet another poll in Pennsylvania, this one from Suffolk, shows Joe Sestak pulling ahead of Arlen Specter (49/40). And a PPP survey of Republicans to measure early support for prospective 2012 presidential candidates places no fewer than four candidates (Mike Huckabee with 25 percent; Mitt Romney with 23 percent; Newt Gingrich with 21 percent, and Sarah Palin with 20 percent) in a virtual dead heat.
Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.
Tags: Alan Mollohan, Arkansas, Arlen Specter, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Campaigns and elections, Dan Mongiardo, Danny Tarkanian, Democratic Party, Georgia, Jack Conway, Joe Sestak, John Kitzhaber, Judd Gregg, Kelly Ayotte, Kentucky, Mike Huckabee, Mike Oliverio, Mitt Romney, Nathan Deal, Newt Gingrich, Oregon, Paul Hodes, Pennsylvania, Politics and politicians, Public opinion, Rand Paul, Republican Party, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, Sue Lowden, Tea Party, Tom Graves, Trey Gray, West Virginia
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010
Ed Kilgore
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.
by Ed Kilgore
Something interesting is going on in Arkansas Democratic politics right now: a serious primary challenge to an incumbent senator, Blanche Lincoln, who is not mired in any sort of personal scandal, and is not, it would seem, mispositioned ideologically for a general election in her conservative state.
As Steve Kornacki notes at Salon today, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter’s primary challenge to Lincoln is hard to categorize as simply an ideological challenge to a wayward politician who has offended the party base, or as simply an “electability” challenge to a weakened incumbent who looks likely to lose in November:
Generally, it’s easy to categorize these primary challenges. There are two basic varieties: ideological, with an exercised party base seeking retribution for an incumbent’s dissent from the party-line; and pragmatic, with party members responding to the perceived electoral deficiencies of the incumbent. And then there’s the Democratic Senate primary now underway in Arkansas, which seems to be a perfect hybrid of these two types. With the latest poll showing Blanche Lincoln’s challenger, Bill Halter, within 13 points of her, that primary – now just seven weeks away – has become the hottest Democratic contest in the nation.
Lincoln, who’s in the final year of her second term, has managed to pull off a somewhat remarkable feat, infuriating both the left-of-center base of her party and her state’s right-leaning general election audience at the same time. Thus, the challenge she’s receiving from Halter doesn’t neatly fit into either of the above categories.
Kornacki goes on to examine prior examples of ideological primary challenges, and finds little evidence of any that were also based on evidence of superior electibility (absent some non-ideological factor like a personal scandal affecting the incumbent’s political standing).
Now it should be obvious that Kornacki’s premise would not be accepted by a fair assortment of people in both parties. Among both self-identified progressives in the Democratic Party, and most especially self-identified conservatives in the Republican Party, many have argued for decades that “centrists” aren’t really more electable, and that rigorously ideological candidates could actually, if given the chance, exert a superior general-election appeal (via better “frames,” or clearer messages, or by mobilizing non-voters, or simply by providing a “choice”), even in difficult partisan terrain like the one Democrats face in Arkansas. There’s definitely evidence that this proposition is true at times and in places where there are significant numbers of voters who are “mispositioned” by adherence to parties with ideologies alien to their own (e.g., southern conservative Democrats in the 1980s and 1990s, and northern moderate-to-liberal Republicans more recently). A subset of the “electability” argument for ideological rigor is that Democratic progressives or conservative Republicans can and will offer messages that have particular appeal to swing voters in a given constituency. That’s also sometimes true, as with antiwar Democrats in times of unpopular wars, or with anti-tax Republicans in places where some state or local tax revolt is underway.
But the Halter challenge to Lincoln is emphatically not in a state where there are liberals outside the Democratic Party ripe for the picking, and there’s not much evidence that Arkansans are generally receptive to any particular progressive arguments, notwithstanding the ancient claim that southerners are especially receptive to anti-corporate “populism” (a complicated topic which I won’t get into here, other than to say that I personally think the claim is vastly overstated since southern conservatives are conservatives on nearly every imaginable topic, including economics).
Lincoln is, however, an incumbent senator at a time when incumbency is not an advantage, and that alone could make Halter as competitive as, if not more competitive than, Lincoln in a general election. And it’s not as though Halter is running as the re-incarnation of Huey Long. His anti-corporate rhetoric, in fact, is pretty much indistinguishable from what we hear from Tea Party folk, opposing bailouts rather than promoting regulation.
It appears Lincoln’s strategy (other than touting endorsements from relatively popular Democrats like Bill Clinton) is to use Halter’s challenge as evidence that she’s not the raging socialist that Republicans make her out to be. If it works, this playing-off-the-left message would presumably boost her general election standing, thus making it easier for her to appeal to Democrats on electability grounds. But she doesn’t have much time to pull this off, and if she doesn’t, she hasn’t instilled enough loyalty in Arkansas Democrats to give her much confidence in a primary win absent an electability argument.
Arkansas will thus be an interesting test of the limits of tolerance for Democratic heterodoxy in tough terrain. And if Halter wins the primary, his performance in the general election will be watched closely for its broader implications as well. The last widely-discussed Democratic primary challenge to an incumbent senator, the Ned Lamont candidacy in Connecticut in 2006, involved a totally different situation: a blue state, a more famous incumbent, a red-hot issue where Joe Lieberman was horribly mispositioned with local opinion, and most of all, a third-party Lieberman general election candidacy that Republicans largely supported. The results of a Halter nomination in Arkansas would be sui generis.
This item is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist.
Tags: Arkansas, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Campaigns and elections, Democratic Party, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont, Politics and politicians, pragmatic progressives, progressives
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics |
No Comments »
