Posts Tagged ‘
Jerry Brown ’
Friday, December 10th, 2010
Mark Reutter
PPI Fellow Mark Reutter is the former editor of
Railroad History and author of
Making Steel: Sparrows Point and the Rise and Ruin of American Industrial Might (2005, rev. ed.).
by Mark Reutter
The Obama administration yesterday called the bluff of two newly elected Republican governors and regained control of its high-speed rail program. Confronted by Governor-elects Scott Walker of Wisconsin and John Kasich of Ohio, who vowed to kill the administration’s signature high-speed transportation initiative in their states when they take office next month, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood preemptively yanked $1.195 billion not yet spent by the states.
This is good news and something we had urged. It shows resolve by the administration against politically motivated obstructionism. A backlash has been growing in Wisconsin against Walker’s anti-rail rhetoric. Now voters can mull over how he “saved” them money by destroying thousands of construction jobs that the proposed Milwaukee-Madison rail line would have created. Plus Wisconsin and Ohio may owe the federal government upwards of $25 million already spent on rail planning.
The administration said it would redirect the bulk of the freed funds to California and Florida, assuring that these truly transformative projects can move forward even if a Republican House blocks rail funds in the upcoming federal budget.
California will receive $624 million of the redirected funds, adding to the $3 billion previously awarded toward the construction of a 220-mph railway between Los Angeles and San Francisco. Combined with matching state funds from a voter-approved bond referendum, California now has $7 billion committed to the project.
Both outgoing Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and incoming Democratic governor Jerry Brown are strong supporters of the rail project, despite California’s current budget woes. Last week, the California High Speed Rail Authority approved construction of the first leg of the line, a 65-mile stretch in the Central Valley running through Fresno. The redirected funds are likely to enable the authority to extend construction to Bakersfield.
Florida will get $342 million on top of the $2.05 billion previously allocated to build a high-speed train on a new right of way between Orlando and Tampa.
Incoming Republican governor Rick Scott initially opposed the line, but has softened his position, saying he is in favor of high-speed rail so long as Florida taxpayers don’t have to foot the bill. Yesterday’s allocation basically closes the funding gap. It strengthens LaHood’s prediction that the Florida project will break ground next year.
Of the remaining $230 million redirected by LaHood, the state of Washington will receive $162 million to rebuild trackage and signaling on an existing Amtrak route between Portland and Seattle. The other major recipient ($42 million) was Illinois, whose re-elected Democratic Governor Pat Quinn is an ardent rail advocate.
Focusing federal funds on a few core projects is a smart strategy as the administration realizes that additional rail allocations in a Republican-controlled House are far from certain. The redirected rail funds give the administration breathing room to keep the program afloat at least through the 2112 election cycle.
Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), the likely chair the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in January, has been critical of rail projects – such as the now-rescinded Wisconsin and Ohio lines – where trains would only reach maximum speeds of 110 mph.
Mica has repeatedly said he favors speeds of over 150 mph and wants private partners to help fund the projects. Earlier this week, a consortium led by Central Japan Railway said it may offer $210 million in loans to help pay for the Tampa-Orlando line if its high-speed equipment was selected by the state.
Tags: Amtrak, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bakersfield, California, California High Speed Rail Authority, Central Japan Railway, Central Valley, Florida, Fresno, high-speed rail, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, HSR, Illinois, Jerry Brown, John Kasich, John Mica, Los Angeles, Milwaukee-Madison, Obama Administration, Ohio, Orlando, Pat Quinn, Portland, Ray LaHood, Rick Scott, San Francisco, Scott Walker, Seattle, Tampa, Transportation, Transportation secretary, Wisconsin
Posted in
Clean Energy and Modern Infrastructure, Daily Fix, Issues |
2 Comments »
Tuesday, November 23rd, 2010
Mark Reutter
PPI Fellow Mark Reutter is the former editor of
Railroad History and author of
Making Steel: Sparrows Point and the Rise and Ruin of American Industrial Might (2005, rev. ed.).
by Mark Reutter
Talk about a blessing in disguise. Just as the Obama administration’s high-speed rail program was running out of congressionally-appropriated cash, Governor-elects Scott Walker of Wisconsin and John Kasich of Ohio have come chugging to the rescue.
By vowing to kill planned passenger train lines in their states, the newly elected Midwest Republicans have potentially freed $1.2 billion in federal rail money that can be used to build “true” high-speed routes elsewhere. The windfall represents more than the $1 billion that the White House has requested from Congress in next year’s budget. It gives the administration breathing space to keep the program going even if the Republican-led House blocks rail appropriations in 2011.
Since the Wisconsin and Ohio grants are of secondary importance to the national goal of getting a 150-mph-plus rail line up and running, the governors’ anti-train stance amounts to an unintended gift to the Obama administration
To be sure, benefiting high-speed rail was not the intent of Walker and Kasich. Both politicians have a history of hostility to public transit. Walker has opposed light rail, commuter rail and other transit initiatives in his current job as Milwaukee County Executive. Kasich, a former Ohio Congressman turned Fox News host, likes to say that the only kind of train he approves of is a freight train.
Both have called on Washington to divert the rail money to state highway projects. Ray LaHood, U.S. secretary of transportation, said this isn’t permitted under the law. LaHood told a rail conference last week that he plans to reallocate the money to other states and will bill Wisconsin and Ohio for federal funds already spent on the suspended rail lines.
Poor Choices for Rail Aid
The $810 million in Wisconsin money was to extend Amtrak’s existing Milwaukee-Chicago Hiawatha line to Madison, with a top speed of 79 mph in 2013, rising to 110 mph in 2015; Ohio’s $400 million was to build a Cleveland- Columbus-Cincinnati route operating at 79 mph maximum speeds over existing freight tracks. It received a $400 million grant.
The Obama administration funded these projects largely because they were “shovel ready” (a key criteria of the stimulus act that provided $8 billion in rail aid to states) and because they represented “regional balance” for the Midwest that Congressmen from both parties demand when money is allocated for highways.
As we have argued, spreading out federal funds to too many marginal projects is a mistake operationally and politically. Operationally, intercity passenger rail will succeed only if it provides an obvious and understandable margin of superiority over highway trip times. Politically, moderate-speed lines advertised as high-speed (or as “emerging high speed,” in Obama administration nomenclature) confuses the public and opens up the federal initiative to legitimate criticism.
Studies indicate that somewhat-faster service will not create the transformational transportation that will get Americans out of their cars and jumpstart regional economies. This was underscored by a recent study of high-speed rail compared to conventional rail commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
Because the up-front costs of truly modern train lines are high, the administration needs to concentrate on finishing one or two routes with state-of-the-art equipment to prove that fast rail is an efficient and even profitable venture once construction is completed.
Florida Should be Centerpiece
The administration now has the opportunity to fund true high-speed rail by reallocating the Midwest money. It can fully fund the high-speed Tampa-Orlando line in Florida as well as help get a segment of California’s proposed 200-mph railway between San Francisco and Los Angeles into revenue service. There may even be money left over to accelerate “shovel-ready” projects in busy rail corridors with proven ridership in Illinois and Connecticut.
Newly elected California governor Jerry Brown (D) is a strong supporter of his state’s rail program – as is outgoing Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both Illinois incumbent governor Pat Quinn (D) and Connecticut governor-elect Dan Malloy (D) are also pro-train.
Florida’s Republican governor-elect, Rick Scott, initially opposed the Tampa-Orlando line (the current governor, Charlie Crist, supports the project). But Scott has recently relaxed his rhetoric and says he is in favor of high-speed rail so long as Florida taxpayers don’t pay for it.
What reportedly swayed Scott was $800 million in fresh federal funds for the project last month. Florida now has $2.05 billion to complete the $2.6 billion line, including the $1.25 billion in federal funds it received in January.
Public-Private Partnerships
By reallocating a portion of the Wisconsin-Ohio funds, the $550 million gap could be closed. Or better yet, Washington could encourage private companies to invest in the Florida line by using federal funds as an incentive. Already Siemens, the high-speed locomotive maker, has announced interest in bidding on the Florida project if government shares a portion of the operational risk.
Such a public-private partnership would appear to satisfy Scott’s objections and could go a long way to appease Rep. John Mica (R – Fla.), a fan of public-private rail partnerships who is expected to become chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in January.
All of this could leave Wisconsin’s and Ohio’s new chief executives on the wrong side of the tracks. Or as a transportation official told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel last week, “Expanding passenger rail is a national priority. Just because Wisconsin says no doesn’t mean it’s going away.”
Tags: 110 mph, 200-mph, 79 mph, Amtrak, Arnold Schwarzenegger, California, Charlie Crist, Cleveland- Columbus-Cincinnati, Connecticut, Dan Malloy, Florida, Fox News, high-speed rail, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, HSR, Illinois, Jerry Brown, John Kasich, John Mica, Los Angeles, Madison, Midwest republicans, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Milwaukee-Chicago Hiawatha, Obaa administration, Ohio, Pat Quinn, Public Transit, public-private partnerships, Rail Aid, Ray LaHood, regional balance, Republican Governors, Rick Scott, San Francisco, Scott Walker, shovel ready, Tampa-Orlando, Transportation, U.S. Conference of Mayors, U.S. Secretary of Transportation, White House, Wisconsin
Posted in
A New Framework for Growth and Equity, Daily Fix, Issues |
3 Comments »
Tuesday, September 28th, 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
With five weeks to go until Election Day, the national political environment seems to have stabilized enough to conduct some regional analysis of what’s likely to happen on November 2. Let’s start today with the West, where highly competitive gubernatorial and Senate contests are occurring in at least seven states.
Much of the Pacific Coast seems relatively impervious to the Tea Party movement. In California, hard-core conservative activist Chuck DeVore finished a relatively poor third in the Republican Senate primary, and gubernatorial candidate Steve Poizner, who tried to run to the right of Meg Whitman, was beaten badly. Conservatives could not even mount a strong challenge to the much-derided RINO, Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado. In Washington state, another TP favorite, former pro football player Clint Didier, barely broke double figure percentages in a Senate Republican primary challenge to Dino Rossi. And in the same state, one of the more moderate new House candidates in the country, Jaime Herrera, won her primary easily. Alaska, of course, is the exception on the coast, since its long-powerful conservative movement knocked off Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who is now running as a write-in candidate in the general election.
In any event, Republicans have at best mixed prospects for major gains on the Pacific coast. In CA, recent polls have given Barbara Boxer a significant lead over Carly Fiorina for the Senate seat, and despite Meg Whitman’s unprecedented spending, Jerry Brown is at worst tied with her as he begins his own media campaign in the governor’s race. Republicans have a realistic shot at just one Democratic House seat in California, and Democrats are sure to hang onto control of both chambers in the state legislature.
In Washington state, Patty Murray appears to be opening up a modest but consistent lead over Rossi, who led her in some early polls. While Herrera has a good shot at picking up an open Democratic House seat, only one incumbent Democrat, Rick Hansen, seems to be in jeopardy. In Oregon, former Gov. John Kitzhaber is in a close race with Republican Chris Dudley for the governorship.
In Hawaii, Democrats have a better than even chance of flipping control of the governorship, with former congressman Neil Abercrombie a solid favorite over Lt. Gov. Duke Aoina, and of retaking Abercrombie’s House seat, which was lost in a special election earlier this year thanks to multiple Democratic candidates.
In Alaska, Democratic Senate candidate Scott McAdams remains underfunded and little-known; his fate almost certainly depends on the viability of Murkowski’s write-in campaign down the stretch.
Moving eastward from the Pacific, Colorado is another hotly disputed state. Tea Party favorite Ken Buck has been leading Sen. Michael Bennet in early general election polls, but this race is likely to tighten up. John Hickenlooper is almost certain to hold the governorship for Democrats thanks to the conservative split between Republican nominee Don Maes and former congressman Tom Tancredo, who is running on the Constitution Party ballot. Republicans think they have a shot at taking two Democratic House seats, though their best chance is against freshman congresswoman Betsy Markey. Turning south to New Mexico, Republican gubernatorial candidate Susana Martinez has recently taken a steady lead in the polls against Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, who once looked invincible, and two Democratic House members, Harry Teague and Martin Heinrich, in some peril. In Arizona, Sen. John McCain and Gov. Jan Brewer look safe to hold onto their seats for the GOP, and though Republicans have visions of picking up as many as three House seats, all three Democrats—Gabby Giffords, Anne Kirkpatrick and Harry Mitchell, are in reasonably strong condition.
Finally, in Nevada, one of the top national races looks almost certain to go right down to the wire, with Sen. Harry Reid and Tea Party champion Sharron Angle running neck and neck in virtually every post-primary poll. Reid would probably be doomed against any other Republican opponent, but Angle’s long history of eccentric issue positions has given him a new lease on life.
All in all, the West could prove to be a national bellwether. A true Republican tsunami in the region could produce a net gain of four Senate seats (Washington, California, Colorado and Nevada), two governorships (Oregon and New Mexico), and nine House seats. On the other hand, a stronger-than-expected Democratic performance could keep Republicans from gaining any net Senate seats, and could actually give Democrats a net gain of one gubernatorial seat (Wyoming looks to be a certain Republican gubernatorial pickup, but that could be offset by a Jerry Brown win in California and an Abercrombie win in Hawaii). None of the Western House races in which Republicans now look strong is a slam-dunk.
One regional factor that use to bedevil strategists is now of declining importance: the hope or fear that early returns from the eastern and central times zones could influence final turnout in very close races. That’s because voting by mail is increasingly important in the West, with all ballots in OR and WA; most in Colorado; and over half in California, now being cast by mail. The dominance of voting by mail will also significantly limit the impact of very late campaign activity in many states. If Meg Whitman’s going to hit her target of spending $150 million in personal funds in the CA gubernatorial race, she’ll probably hit it well before November 2.
Photo credit: Michael R. Swigart
Arizona
Tags: Abel Maldonado, Alaska, Anne Kirkpatrick, Arizona, Barbara Boxer, Betsy Markey, California, Campaigns and elections, Carly Fiorina, Chris Dudley, Chuck DeVore, Clint Didier, Colorado, conservatives, Constitution Party, Diane Denish, Dino Rossi, Don Maes, Duke Aoina, Election Day, Gabby Giffords, GOP, Harry Mitchell, Harry Reid, Harry Teague, Hawaii, Jaime Herrera, Jan Brewer, Jerry Brown, John Hickenlooper, John Kitzhaber, John McCain, Ken Buck, Lisa Murkowski, Martin Heinrich, Meg Whitman, Michael Bennet, Mid-Term Elections, moderate, Neil Abercrombie, Nevada, New Mexico, November 2, Oregon, Pacific Coast, Patty Murray, Republican Party, Republican Senate primary, Republican tsunami, Rick Hansen, RINO, Scott McAdams, Sharron Angle, Steve Poizner, Susana Martinez, Tea Party, Tom Tancredo, Washington state, Wyoming
Posted in
Daily Fix, Political Memo |
1 Comment »
Friday, September 24th, 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
As the battle for November continued to unfold this week, House Republicans unveiled their long-awaited, long-debated version of the 1994 classic Contract With America. This one was called the Pledge to America.
In figuring out where to fall between cautious national GOP figures who basically would like to overturn the 2006 and 2008 elections and bring back the splendors of the Bush administration, and the elements of the conservative base, radicalized into the Tea Party Movement, who would like to turn back the clock quite a few decades further, the authors of the Pledge struck an interesting balance. The Preamble and Forward of the document are full of fiery Tea Party rhetoric suggesting the illegitimacy of the Obama administration and the need for a radical restructuring of the federal government and the immediate abolition of deficits and debt.
But when the Pledge gets into is specifics, it immediately retreats into limited demands for total repeal of the Obama administration’s initiatives, along with a return to Bush tax and economic policies, and notably abandons the fiscal radicalism that so many Republican candidates this year are campaigning on. There’s no balanced budget promise; no endorsement, even, of a constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment (now, as once before, boilerplate for GOP candidates); and certainly no mention of plans to take on major structural reforms, much less phase-outs, of Social Security and Medicare.
Indeed, the Pledge gives the impression that if the clock could be turned back to August of 2008, before the enactment of TARP, everything would be fine. It will be most interesting to see how that approach squares with candidates and activists who think a return to 1933 is the only possible solution.
The Pledge does create a sort of whack-a-mole problem for Democrats seeking to exploit it. Do they focus on the radical rhetoric that suggests a willingness to go after the basic New Deal/Great Society safety net? Or do they focus on the details that suggest a more modest but equally vulnerable determination to bring back the policies that voters repudiated in 2006 and 2008?
In any event, the very existence of the Pledge offers some hope for Democrats struggling to make the midterm elections something other than a straight-up referendum on the status quo. Under Republican governance, they will be able to argue, things could get worse, unless you really do pine for the salad days of 2006 or 1933.
The other big political development this week, which is still unfolding, is the decision by Senate Democrats against taking the lead on extending middle-class tax cuts and forcing Republicans to champion the extension of upper-class tax cuts, at least until after November. There is still a chance the House will move first, but it’s unlikely given vocal Blue Dog opposition, and the decision is being widely derided as evidence of Democratic over-cautiousness, if not surrender, going into the midterms. It’s an issue that will likely come up, however, in a lame duck congressional session after the elections, though with Republicans, who want to make all the Bush tax cuts permanent, holding a stronger hand.
There’s been some craziness in the polls this week, most notably a Quinnipiac survey showing the very off-the-wall Republican nominee for governor of New York, Carl Paladino, suddenly closing to double-digits against prohibitive Democratic front-runner Andrew Cuomo. The Q-poll did not exactly reinforce its credibility by then releasing a survey showing another lowly-regarded Republican, Joe DioGuardi, trailing Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, by just six percent (Siena, meanwhile, had Cuomo up by 33percent and Gillibrand up by 26percent).
Most survey results this week were more conventional. Mason-Dixon showed Democrat Alex Sink with a 47-40 lead over Republican Rick Scott among likely voters in Florida. The respected Field Poll, also moving to a likely voter model, showed a dead heat between Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman in the California gubernatorial race. And a new national Pew poll showed an unusually large 10-point swing in the GOP’s favor between registered voters and likely voters—though interpretations of such results as reflecting an “enthusiasm gap” often ignore the structural reasons for a Republican advantage in midterm elections.
Finally, Google has come up with a very useful series of maps comparing some of the most credible handicappers’ projections of Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections.
Tags: Alex Sink, Andrew Cuomo, Balanced Budget Amendment, Campaigns and elections, Carl Paladino, Contract with America, enthusiasm gap, Jerry Brown, Joe DioGuardi, Kirsten Gillibrand, Meg Whitman, Pledge to America, Republican Party, TARP, Tea Party
Posted in
Daily Fix, Political Memo |
1 Comment »
Wednesday, September 22nd, 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
Yesterday, I observed that we are getting to the point where all the speculation about individual 2010 contests will begin to yield to hard data, and the actual battlegrounds will emerge.
A good example of how that might be happening is provided by new polls from PPP of two Senate races that have been ostensibly very similar, in WI and CA. In both of these blue states well-regarded but always-vulnerable progressive Democratic U.S. senators are under attack from amply-financed Republican “newcomers.”
But according to PPP, Russ Feingold is suddenly in deep trouble against Ron Johnson, while Barbara Boxer is expanding her lead against Carly Fiorina. Both these polls represent a shift by PPP from registered voter to likely voter samples, making the trends interesting measurements of the so-called “enthusiasm gap” afflicting Democrats.
According to an account by its partner DailyKos, PPP finds the “enthusiasm gap” in WI to be “one of the most severe” in the country, with Johnson’s 1-point lead among 2008 voters ballooning to 11 points among likely 2010 voters.
But in California, Boxer’s 49-40 lead among RVs in July is a virtually unchanged 50-41 lead among likely voters today. More specifically, Boxer’s support among Democrats remains very strong, and as PPP’s Tom Jensen notes:
[T]he simple reality is that Fiorina has not proven to be a particularly appealing candidate to California voters. 42% of them see her unfavorably with only 34% rating her positively. Republicans like her, Democrats dislike her almost as much, and independents are slightly negative toward her. Again, not the formula that’s going to get a Republican elected to the Senate from California.
One other factor that should be noted here is that Boxer is just about the only vulnerable Democrat seeking reelection in a state where the majority of voters still approve of Barack Obama’s performance. His approval is 53/42, and by and large the folks that like Obama are supporting Boxer- California’s one of the last frontiers left where he’s not a drag.
Interestingly, PPP also shows Jerry Brown leading Meg Whitman among likely voters by a 47-42 margin in the CA governor’s race, even though Brown is just now getting around to running television ads.
Now it may be that PPP’s current polling in either WI or CA could prove to be an outlier; it happens to all pollsters on occasion. It’s also true that Russ Feingold has a habit of getting into trouble in his re-election campaigns, only to eventually recover and win.
But whether or not these two races in particular are examples, we should soon begin to see disparities in the host of “close races” we’ve all been watching, and separate the sheep from the goats.
This article is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist
Photo credit: Kat Clay
Tags: Barack Obama, Barbara Boxer, blue states, CA, Carly Fiorina, DailyKos, Democratic Strategist, enthusiasm gap, Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, PPP, progressive Democratic, Republican newcomers, Ron Johnson, Russ Feingold, Senate, Tom Jensen, WI
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics |
No Comments »
Friday, July 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
I know it probably seems like this year’s primary season has been unbearably long. But as July comes to a close, there are 23 state primaries (plus runoffs in, so far, Georgia and Oklahoma, and a special election in West Virginia) still ahead. Next week’s schedule includes primaries on August 3 in Kansas, Michigan and Missouri, and on August 5 in Tennessee. Most of the action is on the Republican side, except in Michigan. Kansas has a close Republican Senate primary and two competitive GOP House contests; Missouri has two big Republican House primaries; and Tennessee has a close three-way Republican gubernatorial contest. In Michigan, both parties have very complex and competitive gubernatorial primaries (including that rarest of phenomena, a Republican candidate campaigning as a moderate), and there’s another strong challenge to Democratic Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick.
In the chattering classes, there’s been considerable discussion the last few days about Democratic efforts to improve morale, particularly a DCCC memo that denies Republicans have much of a chance of taking over the House. FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver mocked the memo as making slopping assumptions about the number of seats “in play” and also taking for granted four takeovers of Republican-held seats that are far from certain. RealClearPolitics’ Sean Trende takes a somewhat different tack, and concludes that Republicans’ prospects in November could be better than in 1994, because their goal is simply to take back two-thirds of the House seats they controlled prior to 2006. (On a different front, Stu Rothenberg of Roll Call accused Democrats of trying to rationalize likely House losses as attributable to factors beyond their control, which provoked me to respond).
There’s lots of fresh polling data. In California, PPP and PPIC (Public Policy Institute of California) have new statewide surveys out, and both show Democrats Jerry Brown and Sen. Barbara Boxer maintaining steady if relatively narrow leads. PPP has Brown leading Meg Whitman 46-40, while PPIC shows him up 37-34 with a big (23 percent) undecided vote. In the Senate race, PPP shows Boxer increasing her lead over Carly Fiorina by 6 points since the June 8 primary. She’s now up 49-40, and just as importantly, has a significantly better approval disapproval rating than Fiorina (Boxer’s is 44/46; Fiorina’s is 28/40). PPIC places Boxer’s lead at 39-34, with, again, a high-undecided rate of 22 percent.
A new Mason-Dixon poll of NV shows Harry Reid and Sharron Angle in a dead heat; Reid leads 43-42, with the favorable-unfavorable ratios of both candidates also being very similar (Reid: 38-51; Angle: 38-47).
Two new surveys in the under-reported Senate race in New Hampshire show Republican front-runner Kelly Ayotte with a significant but shrinking lead over Democratic Rep. Paul Hodes. PPP now has Ayotte up 45-42; a University of New Hampshire poll shows her leading Hodes 45-37.
Last week PPP created a buzz with a poll showing Democrat Alex Sink taking the lead in Florida governor’s race thanks to a toxic Republican primary between Attorney General Bill McCollum and former hospital chain magnate Rick Scott. Now Quinnipiac has a new survey showing both McCollum and Scott basically tied with Sink, with independent Bud Chiles in double-digits and a very large undecided vote.
And Michigan-based EPIC-MRA has a survey out of both parties’ gubernatorial primaries in Michigan. On the Democratic side, the poll shows labor-backed Lansing mayor Virg Bernero holding a 40-32 lead over state legislative leader Andy Dillon. Among Republicans, EPIC-MRA shows a very close three-way race, with former Gateway exec Rick Snyder, who has been openly appealing for Democratic and independent crossover votes, at 26 percent, while Attorney General Mike Cox is at 24 percent and congressman Peter Hoekstra at 23 percent; the latter two candidates have been battling for the Tea Party/”true conservative” vote.
Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.
Photo Credit: hlkljgk‘s Photostream
Tags: Barbara Boxer, California, Carly Fiorina, DCCC, Democratic Party, FiveThirtyEight, Georgia, GOP, Jerry Brown, Kansas, Kelly Ayotte, Meg Whitman, Michigan, Missouri, Nate Silver, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, primary election, RealClearPolitics, Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick, Rep. Paul Hodes, Republican gubernatorial, Roll Call, Tennessee, West Virginia
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Tuesday, July 6th, 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
Having looked at the overall landscape of House and Senate elections recently, it’s probably time for another overview of gubernatorial contests, which will have a bearing not only on state policies but on the upcoming decennial round of redistricting.
There are 37 governorships up for grabs in November, including 19 held by Democrats and 18 by Republicans, which closely reflects the narrow 26-24 Democratic advantage in gubernatorial offices overall. How many of these races are competitive? Well, according to the (subscription-only) Cook Political Report’s Jennifer Duffy, 18 of them, or nearly half, are toss-ups, including eight now held by Democrats and ten by Republicans. Add in eight more that are rated as leaning in one direction or another, and that makes an amazing 26 competitive gubernatorial races, and a range of possible outcomes that’s all over the lot, and won’t necessarily reflect the congressional results. For one thing, even if you concede a Republican “tide” this year, the competitive races are largely in states carried by Barack Obama in 2008: that includes 12 of the 14 currently held by Democrats, and 8 of the 12 currently held by Republicans.
There are races all over the country where late primaries and/or competitive dynamics could change. Fully 21 states with gubernatorial races haven’t yet held primaries (counting Alabama, with a Republican runoff next week), including 18 now rated as competitive. And most states are experiencing deep fiscal problems that cut in all sorts of different directions; it’s not automatically clear in many places whether frightening budget shortfalls will benefit Republicans who are talking about cutting back government or Democrats who are resisting new tax cuts and fighting unpopular teacher layoffs and service reductions. And thanks to term limits, retirements, and primary outcomes, the impact of incumbency is also more limited than you might think: only two of the 12 vulnerable Republican seats (Arizona and Texas), and five of the 14 vulnerable Democratic seats (Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland and Ohio) will have an incumbent on the ballot in November. Making things even more confusing, a significant number of former governors are running as non-incumbents this year, including Democrats Jerry Brown of California, Roy Barnes of Georgia and John Kitzhaber of Oregon, and Republicans Terry Branstad of Iowa and Bobby Ehrlich of Maryland.
I’ll be doing a separate memo focusing on redistricting later on, but it’s worth noting that gubernatorial contests could have a huge impact on that process. For example, there are five states certain to gain congressional seats where Republicans currently control the governorship and both chambers of the state legislature: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Texas and Utah. The first four of those states have competitive governor’s races where a Democratic victory could mess up Republican “trifecta” control just in time for redistricting. New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania, all of which will lose congressional seats, also have very close partisan balances in the state legislature, and Ohio and Pennsylvania have competitive governor’s races. It’s kind of like three-dimensional chess, and well worth watching as we approach November.
Poll Watch
It’s been a quiet week on the polling front. New Rasmussen surveys of the gubernatorial races in Ohio and Pennsylvania show competitive races with GOPers out in front. In Ohio, which has been a very close contest, the poll gives Republican John Kasich a 47-40 lead over incumbent Ted Strickland, his biggest lead in any published poll since a Rasmussen survey in March. In Pennsylvania, however, Rasmussen shows Republican Tom Corbett’s lead over Democrat Dan Onorato dropping from 16 points (49-33) to ten points (49-39) since early June; the 10-point margin is also what PPP reported in its latest Pennsylvania poll.
Meanwhile, in Georgoa, whose primary is on July 20, Insider Advantage has a new poll of the Republican gubernatorial race showing long-time front-runner John Oxendine falling into a tie with Karen Handel at 18 percent, with Nathan Deal at 12 percent. This is a bit counter-intuitive since Oxendine and a fourth candidate, Eric Johnson, have recently been dominating the airwaves with ads, though at Iowa’s Southern Political Report site, John Tures attributes a purported Handel “surge” to her recent endorsement by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, “the next Sarah Palin.” (I have a separate post at FiveThirtyEight examining Brewer’s new national influence.) It’s probably worth noting that shortly before South Carolina’s June 8 primary, Iowa showed Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer headed for a runoff with Nikki Haley; he instead finished a dismal fourth. We’ll see if the firm has got a better “Handel” on Republican sentiment in Georgia.
Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.
Tags: Andre Bauer, Barack Obama, Bobby Ehrlich, Campaigns and elections, Cook Political Report, Dan Onorato, Democratic Party, Eric Johnson, Jan Brewer, Jerry Brown, John Kasich, John Kitzhaber, John Oxendine, John Tures, Karen Handel, Nathan Deal, Nikki Haley, Rasmussen Survey, Republican Party, Roy Barnes, Southern Political Report, Ted Strickland, Terry Branstad, Tom Corbett
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »
Thursday, July 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
One of the more interesting developments on the June 8 “Super Tuesday Primary” day was the approval of a ballot initiative (Prop 14) by California voters creating a “top two” voting system. Similar to the process already used in Washington State, it essentially abolishes party primaries and provides that the top two finishers in a nonpartisan primary will proceed to the general election.
Over at Sabato’s Crystal Ball, TDS contributor and advisory board member Alan Abramowitz of Emory University has examined the claims of Prop 14 backers like Arnold Schwarzenegger that the new system will reduce ideological and partisan polarization in California, and concludes it’s pretty much a nothing-burger. He takes on two particular illusions associated with Prop 14: the idea that party primaries and gerrymandering are responsible for political polarization in California, and the idea that abolishing party primaries will prevent ideologues from winning elections.
On the first topic, his reseach shows:
The most important source of polarization in California politics is the ideological divide between supporters of the two major parties….In both California and the nation, ideological polarization increased considerably over this time period, but it has always been greater in California. That’s because while California Republicans are as conservative as Republicans in the rest of the country, California Democrats are considerably more liberal than Democrats in the rest of the country.
And on the second topic:
In Washington, which began using the new system in 2008, the electoral consequences were minimal. In all 9 of the state’s congressional districts the open primary produced a general election runoff between the Democratic or Republican incumbent and a challenger from the opposing party and in all 9 general election contests the incumbent was victorious. And based on the winners’ voting records in the 111th Congress, the new primary system has had no effect on partisan polarization–the gap between the state’s Democratic and Republican representatives was just as large in the current Congress as it was in the previous one. Expect the same results in California.
So can we just forget about Prop 14? That’s not quite clear just yet. The new system could produce some strange and unintended consequences.
For one thing, making the primary non-partisan could be a major boon to self-funders, who may simply need high name ID to win a general election spot, particularly in California statewide races where the cost of television advertising will be prohibitive for many candidates. For another, the system could theoretically increase partisan polarization. The “top two” system does not provide any particular incentive for winning an actual majority of votes in a primary; the top finisher still must face the runner-up in the general election, where turnout is very likely to be much higher. So the safe thing to do is to nail down a general election spot by appealing to partisans (Prop 14 does not repeal party registration, which means that candidates will know exactly whom to contact with partisan messages), while beginning the general election campaign by going after the other party’s preferred candidate.
Consider this year’s governor’s race. If Meg Whitman were running with her vast fortune in a “top two” system, perhaps she would not have spent quite so much time attacking Steve Poizner for alleged ideological heresy. But on the other hand, she would have had every incentive to go after Democrat Jerry Brown (whom she largely ignored) hammer and tongs to drive up his negatives in preparation for November.
In effect, Prop 14 makes the general election cycle a lot longer. That does not seem to be a particularly smart way to reduce partisan polarization.
This item is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist.
Photo credit: Nancyf’s Photostream
Tags: Alan Abramowitz, Arnold Schwarzenegger, California, Campaigns and elections, Democratic Party, Emory University, Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, Prop 14, Republican Party, Super Tuesday, Washington
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics |
No Comments »
Wednesday, June 9th, 2010
Will Marshall
Will Marshall is the president of the Progressive Policy Institute.
by Will Marshall
It’s hard to tease a coherent story line from yesterday’s primaries in 12 states, so some random observations will have to do:
- Labor unions sure know how to waste their members’ money. A group of unions poured $10 million into the Arkansas U.S. Senate primary to defeat the Democratic incumbent, Blanche Lincoln. Lincoln, aided by native son Bill Clinton, staved off a challenge from Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. The bruising primary battle, however, has left her running far behind her GOP opponent, Rep. John Boozman. What was labor thinking?
- It was a big night for Republican women, including one who wasn’t on any ballot. Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Nikki Haley and Sharron Angle not only won, but generally ran to the right of their opponents. Fiorina and Haley got timely assists from the endorsement of “Mama Grizzly” Sarah Palin.
- Any child can grow up and be elected governor of California -– as long as they amass a fortune on the way. Whitman, one of eBay’s founders, spent a staggering $71 million of her own money in rolling over another Silicon Valley millionaire, Steve Poizner, who could only scrape together $24 million. Whitman will now face Jerry Brown, whose decision to devote his life to public service rather than making money has left him a relative pauper.
- Maybe South Carolina isn’t as backward as everyone thinks. After a GOP state legislator called President Obama and Nikki Haley “ragheads,” Jon Stewart joked that South Carolinians can’t even get their racial slurs right. But in picking Haley to be their nominee for governor, Palmetto State Republicans opted not only for a woman but also the child of Sikh immigrants. First Bobby Jindal, now Haley: Are South Asians becoming the GOP’s preferred ethnic minority and answer to complaints that they lack diversity?
- The dice came up for Sen. Harry Reid. He got his wish when Tea Party acolyte Sharron Angle beat two more moderate contenders for the Republican Senate nomination. The Reid camp figures Nevada voters, however tired they may be of him, aren’t ready for an alternative that makes Barry Goldwater look like a mushy moderate. Angle wants to shut down the federal departments of energy and education, and open Yucca Mountain to nuclear waste. And Reid’s son Rory won the Democratic nomination for governor.
- Blogs may not be a stepping stone to higher office. L.A. gadfly Mickey Kaus won a paltry 5.3 percent of the vote in his primary challenge to Sen. Barbara Boxer. However, since Kaus only spent $40,000, his dollar-per-vote efficiency may be higher than Whitman’s. And he wins a consolation prize for running the most entertaining campaign of the season.
Photo credit: PittCaleb’s Photostream
Tags: Barack Obama, Barry Goldwater, Bill Clinton, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Campaigns and elections, Carly Fiorina, Harry Reid, Jerry Brown, John Boozman, Jon Stewart, Meg Whitman, Nikki Haley, Politics and politicians, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, Silicon Valley, South Carolina, Steve Poizner, Tea Party
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 »
Friday, June 4th, 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
Next Tuesday 10 states (including California, Iowa and Nevada) will hold primaries, and Arkansas and Georgia will hold runoffs for the U.S. Senate and a congressional special election respectively.
There’s something interesting going on in every one of these states, but national attention has mainly focused on California, Iowa, Nevada, South Carolina and Arkansas.
The marquee California races, the GOP nomination battles for governor and U.S. senator, have become a bit anticlimactic, with Meg Whitman appearing to run away with the former and Carly Fiorina with the latter, according to a whole battery of recent polls (see the trendlines here and here). Total spending in the GOP governor’s race has now gone over $100 million, but Steve Poizner’s stretch-drive efforts to make the primary revolve entirely around Meg Whitman’s refusal to endorse Arizona’s new immigration law don’t seem to be striking much gold. Whitman, at some peril to her general election standing, has continued round-the-clock aerial pounding of Poizner for alleged liberalism on abortion and spending.
Fiorina has been the only Senate candidate recently on the air, though at vastly smaller levels than the gubernatorial candidates, but may also be benefitting from a consolidation of the conservative vote against pro-gay-rights, pro-choice early front-runner Tom Campbell, at the expense of the other conservative candidate, Tea Party favorite Chuck DeVore.
While political junkies might hope for late drama in these races, it’s worth noting that roughly half the vote in California will be cast early by mail.
In both contests, the Democrats (Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer) awaiting the ultimate victor in November have enjoyed the intra-Republican slugfest as an opportunity to raise money, and both have been moving up to solid leads in general election polls.
As always, the California primary ballot has a number of initiatives, but the only one of national significance this time around would create a Louisiana-style “jungle primary” system that abolishes party primaries altogether and sends the top two performers (if no one wins a majority) into a runoff. In the current California atmosphere of deep hostility to the status quo, the initiative has a good chance of passage despite strong opposition from both major parties.
Iowa’s Republican primary is interesting mainly as a barometer of that very influential state’s conservative movement, currently obsessed with overturning last year’s state court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, and its potential impact on the 2012 presidential campaign. In the gubernatorial primary, former four-term governor Terry Branstad (who has been endorsed by Mitt Romney) is the far-and-away front-runner, but the one recent public poll shows hard-core cultural conservative Bob Vander Plaats (Mike Huckabee’s 2008 campaign chairman in the state) within theoretical striking distance. An upset would be very bad news for Romney, and very good news for embattled Democratic incumbent Chet Culver. But Branstad got a late break yesterday when Sarah Palin surprisingly (given the less-than-warm feelings of her close right-to-life allies toward the former governor) endorsed his candidacy. There are also a couple of very competitive Republican House primaries, particularly the contest to choose an opponent for Democratic Rep. Leonard Boswell, in which former Iowa State University wrestling coach Jim Gibbons in the favorite.
In Nevada, the big development has been the steady decline in support for the longtime front-runner in the Republican Senate race, Sue Lowden, and a surge in support for Tea Party stalwart Sharron Angle, who has also benefitted from Club for Growth backing. Two polls this week have shown Angle running significantly ahead of both Lowden and Las Vegas businessman Danny Tarkanian. But Angle presently appears to be the weakest candidate against incumbent Harry Reid, who has been slowly rising in general election polls. Reid will have a big financial advantage over the winner of the GOP primary. Meanwhile, in the governor’s race, scandal-plagued incumbent Republican Jim Gibbons looks almost certain to lose to former Attorney General Brian Sandoval, who will face Harry Reid’s son Rory (who is Clark County Commission Chairman).
The South Carolina Republican gubernatorial primary has turned into a circus of late with all attention focused on allegations of marital infidelity against state Rep. Nikki Haley, the hard-core conservative “reformer” (and Mark Sanford protégé) who took a lead over three rivals right before the allegations broke. If no further proof of the allegations emerges before next Tuesday, Haley will make it into a runoff, though it’s unclear whether Attorney General Henry McMaster (the early favorite), U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett (who’s been struggling to defend his vote for TARP), or Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer (who has high unfavorable ratings and has been accused by Haley of feeding the allegations against her) will survive with her. In the overshadowed Democratic primary, state Rep. Vincent Sheheen is a slight favorite over state school superintendent Jim Rex, with a runoff possible.
And in Arkansas’ Democratic Senate runoff, there hasn’t been any credible public polling of the Bill Halter/Blanche Lincoln battle, but the shape of the race as a war of labor and business surrogates hasn’t changed since the primary, with unions spending well over $2 million in the runoff for Halter, and business groups running ads attacking Halter on Lincoln’s behalf. Lincoln is mostly relying, however, on personal campaigning with Bill Clinton. And for all the TV ads in this race, it will largely come down to turnout, with Lincoln focusing on African-American voters and Halter trying to get southern Arkansas voters to return to the polls. As the challenger in an anti-incumbent year who exceeded expectations in the primary, Halter is the assumed favorite, but anything could happen if turnout’s low.
Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.
Photo credit: Aprilzosia’s Photostream
Tags: Andre Bauer, Barbara Boxer, Bill Clinton, Bill Halter, Blanche Lincoln, Bob Vander Plaats, Brian Sandoval, Campaigns and elections, Carly Fiorina, Chet Culver, Chuck DeVore, Danny Tarkanian, Gresham Barrett, Harry Reid, Henry McMaster, Jerry Brown, Jim Gibbons, Jim Rex, Leonard Boswell, Mark Sanford, Meg Whitman, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Nikki Haley, Politics and politicians, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, Steve Poizner, Sue Lowden, Terry Branstad, Tom Campbell, Vincent Sheheen
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
1 Comment »
Friday, May 28th, 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 country remains largely focused on the Gulf oil spill going into the Memorial Day weekend, but the large batch of upcoming primary elections will keep candidates on the campaign trail and on every available communications medium.
One notable primary, Idaho’s, was held since our last update, and in the GOP competition to take on Democratic Rep. Walt Minnick, front-runner and national Republican wunderkind Vaughn Ward was beaten by state Rep. Raul Labrador, despite late personal appearances with Ward by Sarah Palin. Ward damaged himself with several gaffes, including incidents of apparent plagiarism in his speeches and a boneheaded debate statement suggesting that Puerto Rico is a foreign country. Meanwhile, Labrador (who was actually born in Puerto Rico) benefited from Tea Party support.
Next Tuesday primaries will be held in Alabama, Mississippi (whose state elections are in off-years) and New Mexico. The marquee contests then are the Democratic and Republican gubernatorial primaries in Alabama. Among Democrats, long-time front-runner Rep. Artur Davis is trying to hold off a late upswing in support for state Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks. Davis, an African-American, has ceded endorsements by four major African-American groups in the state to Sparks, who is white. That, along with Davis’ vote against health reform in Congress, seems to be fueling Sparks’ campaign, and the competition is getting a bit nasty down the stretch, with Sparks accusing Davis of breaking campaign finance laws and Davis running an ad accusing Sparks of discrimination at his agency.
The Alabama Republican gubernatorial contest looks to be boiling down to a question of whether Judge Roy Moore or Tim James joins state community college chancellor Bradley Byrne in a runoff. Byrne has strong business support, and is the closest thing to a moderate (by Alabama GOP standards) in the race. Moore is, of course, a Christian Right icon, and James, the son of a former party-switching governor, has sought to horn in on Moore’s political turf, helped by his own substantial financial resources. Byrne and James have been accusing each other, somewhat implausibly, of secret ties to the Alabama Education Association. And Byrne has gone after James’ famous “English-only” viral ad for threatening the foreign investment on which Alabama disproportionately depends. Believe it or not, James has had to deal with a rumor that he’s said he would cut the salary of Alabama football coach Nick Saban.
Campaigns are approaching red-hot status in many of the June 8 primary states. The hottest, and certainly the strangest, has been in South Carolina, whose Republican gubernatorial campaign was roiled this week by a conservative blogger’s claim that he had an “inappropriate physical relationship” with front-running candidate state Rep. Nikki Haley. She’s denied it categorically, and the blogger and Haley’s campaign have engaged in a cat-and-mouse game where the former has slowly released highly circumstantial “evidence” based on text message and cell phones records, and the latter has challenged the former to come forward with real evidence or shut up. Haley seems to be winning the p.r. battle the state so far, and today, the saga could take a new turn as RedState blogger Erick Erickson, one of Haley’s legion of national conservative supporters, is promising to release evidence that the accuser was paid to make the allegations (possibly by someone connected with a rival campaign). Interestingly, the whole story broke as Haley surged into the lead in polls; her most likely runoff opponent is Attorney General Henry McMaster.
In California’s torrid Republican primaries, it’s becoming reasonably clear that Meg Whitman is finally putting away Steve Poizner in the governor’s race (though Poizner is now staking everything on attacking Whitman’s opposition to the Arizona immigration law), and Carly Fiorina seems to be suddenly pulling away from Tom Campbell and Chuck DeVore in the Senate race.
In Nevada, the Republican primary to choose an opponent for highly vulnerable Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has turned into an unpredictable three-way fight, with long-time front-runner Sue (“Chickens for Checkups”) Lowden trying to hold off Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle, with Danny Tarkanian not far back.
But in both California and Nevada, there are growing signs that Republican primary infighting could damage the GOP in close general election battles. In CA, the vicious and incredibly expensive Whitman-Poizner contest has been accompanied by a steady rise in the polls by Democrat Jerry Brown. The focus on immigration in the GOP race probably won’t help the party’s already fragile relationship with Latino voters, either.
And in Nevada, Harry Reid, once left for dead by most observers, is creeping back into close contention with his potential GOP opponents, actually leading the rapidly surging Sharron Angle.
UPDATE: Another strange turn in the Nikki Haley saga in South Carolina, as RedState’s Erick Erickson finally released a post following up his promise yesterday that he had the goods on someone paying big money to blogger Will Folks to smear Haley, and would “name names.” In what was apparently an attempted send-up of Folks’ own methodology, Erickson offered no evidence of a payoff at all, but instead simply expressed his own weakly documented suspicions that Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer might have had something to do with it. Hilarious, eh?
Tags: Alabama, Artur Davis, Bradley Byrne, Campaigns and elections, Carly Fiorina, Chuck DeVore, Democratic Party, Erick Erickson, Harry Reid, Henry McMaster, Idaho, Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, Nikki Haley, Paul Labrador, Politics and politicians, Public opinion, RedState, Republican Party, Ron Sparks, Roy Moore, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, South Carolina, Steve Poizner, Sue Lowden, Tea Party, Tim James, Tom Campbell, Vaughn Ward, Walt Minnick
Posted in
Daily Fix, Fixing Our Broken Politics, Political Memo |
No Comments »